last_niceguy

I would think that the Minister of Finance would go before Martin goes. Today during question period he was asked when he would resign. I can see it as a possibilty especially after the comments he made a few weeks ago about Martin's new additions to the budget. You would think that a PM who is a former Minister of Finance (who could not count very well) would understand the hardship these new additions are causing his Minister...

Hear, hear!

I used to post a lot in hockey message boards before the lock-out happened and there used to be a lot of additional boards to just post cool little things such as interesting articles, good songs, funny threads, etc. They were a lot of fun and often gave members a chance to blow some steam off if one or more hit heads in the more serious boards. Just offering my opinion on the issue, but I think like a Lounge board or something would be a lot of fun. You could even call it something like Maple Leaf Pub

The GDP is measure in Canadian dollars. How can we measure unpaid work in a figure that measure in dollars?

I am not too sure about this one. On one hand the provincial governments do cause an massive amount of headaches in the Federal government. Programmes such as Healthcare and Education which were not considered important in 1867 when the powers were divided cannot be run by the higher Federal government because the provinces will not give them up. I wonder however, how much more headache would happen when there would be many many varying municiple governments crying to the Federal government as opposed to one provincial government. I am not not sure about this one at all...

If I recall correctly this issue was brought up in the television programme and what was pointed out in what takes place in New Zealand is that the minority governments that are formed with each party (because there would be several new parties) have a less varying platform and thus would be able to form blocs together. Without question the greatest arguement against PR is that the governement would work slower. Its a matter of which is more imporant having an effficient government, or having a more represented government.

In our Canadian legal system the burden of proof lies on the party who is presenting their case against another person or persons. In Canada it is the duty of the Crown to provide proofs or evidence of their claims in order to proves the guilt of the person. If the Crown in unable to put together a strong argument then the person walks. I think that a debate ought to run in the same manner. The person making the claim ought to provide evidence to support it. The ideal situation being that any arguement presented already has with it evidence that way the debating party does not have to demand evidence they can simply ginve their 'proofs' or 'evidence' to support their claims. It seems to be a waste of a post to simply say "prove it". If I say that all men are cats then I should have some type of proof to present with that and then the posts that follow can challenge the evidence I presented, present more evidence for or against my claim or even provide support to my arguement. But I should never just say that all men are cats and then leave it at that. So in my opinion the burden of proof is on the orginal poster he/she must provide the initial evidence to back up the claim being made not only for their own good but for the well-being of the discussion to follow it.

Remind me never ever ever to get on your bad side. (But you make a good point!)

What about Muslim women in foreign countries. We seem to be more interested in their rights then the rights of any woman here in Canada.

I understand that and I read that thread. It is just that inlight of the possiblity of an upcoming election I was wondering if people's opinions have changed, because now its not just a matter of he NDP wanting more votes we have seen how the minority government (a product of this system) has failed. Do that effect our faith in the current system? Sorry, I should have clarified that more in my first post.

I just finished watching Focus on CPAC and the topic for this episode was Proportional Representation. Last election the NDP talked a lot about it, and the Conservatives have been talking about electorial change for quite some time. The programme focused on the success of the system in New Zealand and talked about its effects on Canada if put into pratice. Here is just a simple break-down of how the parties feel about it: Liberal - Not going to happen. Conservative - A Possibilty. NDP - A must! Green Party - A must! What does everyone think about it? I am still undecided on the issue. Which is why I want to hear what others have to bring to the table.

Trudeau was the 'people's Prime Minster'. He seemed human whether he was wearing scandles and a Cabnet meeting or sneaking piroettes behind the Queen. His speeches on Modern Liberalism and Canada as a nation were inspiring. The man was not loved for what he did, he was loved for how he did.

Harper needs to slow down a bit on the paint job that he is slapping on the Liberals about the 'deal with the devil' and what not. We have to remember that we are still talking about Canadian politics, hardly forces of good and evil fighting for the souls of the world. Harper needs to have a smooth platform and should focus on numbers and proofs rather then harsh claims about the Liberal party (they have killed themselves on their own and Canadians already know it). Also, I have heard some people talk about how Harper is just try to get the 'old guys out of there' he needs to show how the 'old' guys are the ones who are very lazy in the leadership of the nation. I was just talking to my English teacher on Friday and we both agreed that the Liberals are too much like some secret clan in their upper powers. We don't need a party like that running our country because that is how we run into problems.

I was ready for an election the day Martin moved his calculator (which is not good at adding) into the Office of the Prime Minister...

I have always liked Harper. Even during the years that I was a Liberal I hated the man because he just said the right stuff and seemed the best man to lead the country. Lately he has said some things that bother me, such as the little slip about the multi-parliaments a few months ago, and I am edgy about his ties with the Bloc. However, out of Paul (I don't know what I am doing) Martin and Jack (Trade union party) Layton I see Stephen Harper as the best canidate. (no need to include the Bloc in there at all!)