geoffrey

New Global National/IPSOS Reid poll from Tuesday Wednesday show that the Conservatives are gaining ground. Liberals 31% (-7%) Conservatives 30% (+4%) NDP 19% (+1%) BQ 13% (+2%) As well, when asked about some specific issues: 54% of Canadians think that the Liberals are fundamentally corrupt. 50% of Canadians think the Liberals have lost their moral right to govern. Margin of error is 3.1% 19 times out of 20. 1,012 adults were surveyed. http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?...984a3acc&page=1 Good news for those a little tired of the Liberals, maybe there is a chance, however small of one, of a Conservative minority.

So I assume that you are equally outraged by the electoral systems used across Canada. It must drive you nuts that so many that didn't vote for the alberta Tories are none-the-less bound by the tyranny of the majority. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The Alberta Tories or any other political party don't prevent you from making a living. When a union strikes, some people are financially ruined. The option of crossing the picket line exists for some, but that is meet with violence and future trouble with the company. It is not at all the same system, not whatsoever.

Why is it good to see that people believe the lies of the opposition parties? There is no evidence impicating Martin in the scandal no matter how much the CPC and the BQ whine. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sparhawk you know that's completely ridiculous. Martin was Finance Minister, making him responsible for the Finances of the government. If such a scandal occured in the private sector, the company's CFO would surely be found guility of fraud. Ignorance of what was happening is not an excuse. If he didn't know, then its even worse, because then we all know he wasn't doing his job.

Why are there no rights to NOT join unions? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You can have the right to, but usually a collective barginning agreement will include some sort of clause such as said company can't hire non-union workers for x positions. I may be wrong on this, I am no lawyer, but that is my understanding anyways. It's really too bad when this happens, unions only ever hurt both companies and the worker in the long run, but when a majority states their opinion, you must accept it. You'd have union types arguging the same, that because 5 of 500 employees want to start a union, they should be able to. It's a problem either way.

G & M R-C <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Coderre won't actually follow through and sue. He can't, its way to risky for him the Liberals. If he did, the BQ defended themselves on the premise that the flyer is true, the Liberals would be very damaged by the publicity, even if the flyer proves false (which it wouldn't I'd wager). It's good to see that Quebecers also believe that Martin had his hand in the piggybank.

ENTP as well.

Move to Calgary. We need you, our unemployment is under 3% and we are screaming for skilled and unskilled workforce. I don't know what your skill set is, but I'm sure you'd have no difficulty finding a job in Calgary right now.

Trade requires rules. If rules are broken they must be enforced. NAFTA was a contract that the US signed and they refuse to live up to it. If you signed a contract with someone and they refused to live up to the terms would you pretend it never happened and conduct business as usual or would you use whatever legal means possible to pressure the other party into living up to the terms of the contract?Look at it another way: bringing in China as competition for Alberta oil is an excellent negotiating tactic. You always stress the need for a negotiated settlement. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Agreed, we should bring as many parties in to bid for our oil. It does already occur to some extent on international commodity markets, but some more direct trade with China would be nice. One of our major problems is that we don't import enough from the US. And what we do, is critical for our business here. The best way to combat a protectionist tariff is to hit them where it hurts most to the US. However, that can't be done, because of the huge comparitive advantage they hold over us in finished products. Technology and refined fuel products would make sense, perhaps cars, but these would all hurt us at home.

Teacher strikes anger me the most out all all union activities. They claim it doesn't hurt students, it is for their own good, but I myself was nearly caught not graduating because of a immenient teacher's strike. I truly feel sorry for those BC students that are being denied their rights by a union dedicated to greed. If the teachers wanted to act in the best interests of their students, they would have gone on strike in the summer, or maybe proposed an agreement themselves. I want to see this, and other teacher unions broken, as they act contrary to public good. Perhaps a lawsuit or a human rights complaint by one of the students for them denying his/her right to basic education.

Very good point. However, I'd see the Conservatives just eliminating the traditional Senate and replacing it EEE just like that as soon as they put up and resistance. I'm no constitutional lawyer, so I don't know how this is done, but I'm sure there is a way around the Senate.

Canada does not have a Car company,we manufacture for either American of Japanese companies.I believe we are the only G8 country that does not have it's own national car company.We have little to say about cars we make for others. As for cod.....what cod? The only thing we have is natural resources. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> We manufacture Asian and American cars, some of which are resold to the United States. Use that in the trade war. Canada also does not have an oil company, nor resources. Natural resources are owned provincally. They can't be touched by Ottawa, it is in the BNA Act for the original provinces, and in specific acts for the later additions to confederation. The point I was making is that it makes as much sense to use Ontario's auto industry or Quebec's power industry or something along the lines of that. Ottawa owns neither. And to Sparhawk, it is fine if China buys our oil at a higher cost, it doesn't matter. I fear Ottawa would do something more along the lines of the Wheat Board.

I don't think many educated people, conservatives, liberal, neo-fascist, communist or hippie-anarchists would argue that global warming isn't happening. You hear the common folk saying it is all to blame on the oil companies, or on the other side, that it doesn't exist. The simple fact is that it is happening, the world is getting warmer. That is proven scientific fact. However, there is no proven scientific fact that it is related to industrial development to the extent that the environmental left tends to state. Forest fires cause great amounts of CO2 to be released into the atomosphere, among other things. Not to mention, the most influential green house gas (on global warming) is water vapor. Last time I checked we weren't shooting water into the air. These are all contributing factors to a natural cycle of heating and cooling the Earth has seen. Lay of industry. Environmental change is needed, I wouldn't argue that. But imposing impossible restrictions is only going to hurt workers and investment in Canada, and that is something we cannot afford.

Sell our cars to China or something like that, maybe cod . Anything but oil. We all knew (we being Albertans) that the feds were going to try to take our money somehow, and if declaring a trade war on the Americans with our products is the way they are going to do it, they are only asking for additional discontent in the West. Alberta oil can be more cheaply refined and sold to Americans than Chinese, creating a larger profit margin. Transfering business from the US to China will hurt Alberta, but benifet the rest of the country that produces softwood when the US caves in on that issue. Not to mention, maybe I'm mistaken, but I don't see how Ottawa can dictate who private industry can sell to? If anyone knows how Martin can claim he's going to take our oil to China, I'd like to hear about this.

Let the people graduate with poli sci and english degrees. Leaves more jobs for the rest of us that understand where there is real money to be had. Plus it creates tons of teachers. There is simply too many people in universities anyways, and we can't have an over abundance of professionals. We should be raising tution rates and standards to exclude more people so we aren't wasting our resources on people that will not use those resources to contribute back to society. Like Argus said, most of these arts majors spend 4 or 5 years to become a clerk. That is money better invested in our business schools, medical schools, sciences and engineering. I'd be interested in knowing the government's portion of tution payments, or more correctly worded, their contribution per undergrad. I would not be shocked if we are spending millions if not billions on these, yes, useless graduates. My U of C is 174, it will be nice to see that improve with the latest major investment from Ralph and the 700mil in additional improves they plan over the next couple years.

I don't know much about ecological sciences, but I think I'm safe to assume that a 2.3 billion dollar clean up is more than a couple spilled garbage bags. Does anyone know what this 2.3B clean up is cleaning up? And considering it regards the AECL, it created a bit of a concern to me that there is a big, possibly radioactive, mess somewhere in Canada.

Start a gas station if you think price gouging is happening, and charge your dramatically lower price. You'd make a killing, or perhaps you'd be stuck charging the same price. If there is any chance at all, which I don't think there is, it is the oil companies gouging and not the retail outlets. Seriously, just deal with it, commodities go up and down in price. I'm sure we'd all love to afford to drive cars but it isn't sustainable and therefore some have to go without. Simply isn't enough gas.

Immigration is most definately a double-edged sword, and its hard to know exactly where to draw the line on this issue. In our country, where our birth rate is too low to sustain our population, it is required to keep us from just disappearing. However, opening the flood gates to more street racers and gang members is the wrong way to approach the issue. In my city, Calgary, we have seen a dramatic increase in murders as gang violence escalates. And not to sound like I'm racially attacking a certain group, because the Asian community in Calgary contributes greatly to our city, but it 90% of the time associated with Asian immigrants. Everyday we hear stories of skilled people, or those with large amount of money (potential economic spending in Canada) being turned away or delayed in the immigration process. At the same time, we hear of criminals fleeing justice (or as they claim 'injustice') of their own countries being given an express ticket to continue their exploits within our borders. Serious review on immigration must happen, but increasing it broadly will only hurt our society.

I still find the best way to debunk the Bush haters out there is to ask them why? No one really has a good reason why anyone would want to be involved in these conspiraces, besides money. "So why does Georgie B. want to hold those people in Gitmo if they aren't a threat?" "Because." or... "Because he wants oil" Really no one has an idea. Unless they pull out the hate card. "Because he hates muslims" Even though his family is well connected with many muslims around the world. Oh boy do I love conspiracy theorists.

One main argument for welfare is that, well, its fair that everyone has a minimum standard of living. But explain to me how it is fair that I have to work and Mr. (or Miss or Mrs or whatever you may be) Welfare doesn't. Lets limit welfare to shorter time, like 3 months. You can't find a job, then tough. I have younger siblings that aren't even adults that have had no problem finding a job that if they worked full time at would make as much as welfare. Mentally sick or physically disabled is different. And I don't classify druggies into either, they don't deserve my money no matter what they claim. These people need to be helped, but only if they truly can't find employment due to their impairments. No one should die because they were born a quadrapaligic (sorry spelling), however, someone who likes their cocaine and meth really doesn't deserve a penny from me.

We are all second class citizens to the gays. Your not a bigot to find fault with this, many, if not most, Canadians do. I can't see many other situations when 2 or 3 percent of the population can force a law through parliment that only benifets them. If they use their sexual orientation to gain power, then by all means, we can see them as a seperate group. If they want to be equal, quit demanding that their 'culture' be recognized as distinct. If I were to have a straight pride parade, I'm sure someone out there would suggest I be tried from human rights abuses.

Agreed Toro, you really can't argue with results. GAI just sounds like another way for people to mooch off my money that I actually work for. If I can make a sustainable living as a university student, then really, I have no sympathy for those that can't. Your financial situation, in terms of living sustainably or being poor, is in your hands. If you don't want to work full time or two jobs or whatever you have to do to put food on the table and a roof over your head, then really don't complain. You deserve to be where your at. The fact that I, being this university student, that pays thousands in tution a year and still manages to make above the poverty line in income and pay taxes to those that decide not to work(yes I have support too from family, but I do make enough to support myself without school costs), is completely insulting to me. A better idea than GAI. Complete tax credits for university students that actually are going to contribute to society instead of leech off it.

Get rid of the GG. End of debate, end of controversy, end of endless taxpayers money hole. Nothing good has come from this position in many many years, it's time for a change in thinking. When something causes you that many problems and controversies nationally, it's time for it to kick off.

Won't happen, oil prices are already over-inflated. The cost of oil is way beyond its worth, and if you look at options and futures prices, this is reflected by those that actually understand how markets work. I believe someone posted earlier in this forum or thread a link to some futures prices for oil and its in a decline. Now if you've taken any finance, or have an understanding for it, you'd see that a future price per share is generally higher than the projected commodity price at the time for which the future is purchased. Its sort of your gas price for the winter if you lock in. You buy higher than it might be, just in case it may go higher, even though it never really does. I've confused myself with this, but really, it is sound business. Otherwise it simply isn't a sound investment. So oil prices are going down regardless. Anyways, back towards the topic of if the government should do something or not, there really shouldn't be much of a debate. For the first time in many years, we've been given the opportunity to give us a major trade advantage over the rest of North America and perhaps the world. With our transportation costs 50% lower than the states, we'd increase the profitability of our businesses. This would in turn attract many American companies across the border, especially resource companies and manufacturers. The tax money is ridiculous, its nothing compared to royalties and thsoe royalties are just piling up right now, with both the Feds and the oil rich Provinces. The corporate taxes payed by the oil companies are a massive source of tax funding for the Feds as well. It's time to cut the excise tax and GST on gasoline, it is hurting our businesses (especially small business) and we are losing a criticial opportunity to gain a competitive edge over our major competitors in the global market.

So mirror, let me get this straight. Because Costco pays more, and because Toyota likes universal health care, the conservatives are damaged? This a key example of how the left defends their stances on issues, using emotional tactics. Oh how we love Costco, but it still puts small business out of business just like Wal-mart. So really, you have nothing with that example. Wal-mart has a bad image, but people continue to shop there. This means either of two things: a) It doesn't have a bad image... or B ) Canadian consumers, those that you are apparently out to defend, don't care about the thousands of small businesses that walmart has destroyed, and shop there simply because of that greed that you yourself said is so destructive to a company. Toyota also employs over 200,000 American workers, way more than they do in Canada. So really, your argument has no factual ground at all. Great to see jobs coming to Canada, but to say that the conservatives would destroy these jobs (I'm somewhat assuming thats what your implying through bringing partisan politics into the issue), is absolutely ridiculous.

Economic Left/Right: 6.50 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 4.87 Over with Georgie B and Thatcher. Not really too suprised.