How many Green votes?

[kengs333]

I know it wasn't a valid analogy - I said so. But the fact is that our political system is a level playing field and every party gets the same opportunity. IMO the Green Party did not do anything to deserve what recognition they did get (from the media or anyone) and the resulting vote confirms that. At least 9 out of 10 voters does not consider the Green Party to be a viable alternative. End of story.

There's a difference between "not valid" and "it's a stretch".

It's not a level playing field. Never has been, and probably never will be. And it's not for you to say whether a party "deserve what recognition they did get". I personally think that the Cons don't deserve the recognition they get, and would like to see how they would fare if they got the same amount of meagre coverage that the Green Party does. You seem to be hopelessly naive when it comes to how the political process works in this country; you just take it for face value.

I say next election the Marxist Leninist Party, CAP, Progressive Canadian Party, and Green Party get $50,000,000 each and exclusive media coverage and exclusive access to the leaders debate, and I can guarentee it that the next government would be formed by one of these parties.

AS long as they continue to be a one-issue party they will not get any recognition, or respect. Sorry, but that's the truth - there are always winners and losers.

It's not a one-issue party. That's a willful lack of understanding on your part. Read the platform. It's no more a one-issue party than the Cons are.

[Alta4ever]

Just because I support the Green Party doesn't mean I agree with every single thing they say and do.

I chose GP as the best of what we have (for me, of course).

I have my own views, some of which I shared with my Green candidate.

Burning coal is an insult to the last 200 years of tecnological evolution, its use should have ended with the second millenia.

Oil should be next one out the door, REGARDLESS of whehter CO2 is causing global warming or not.

Cars should be phased out next, with the urban architecture returning to human-centric from car-centric.

So.....now that you'vr solved torontos problem, whay about the western world where mass trasit isn't viable, and walking to work would take 12 hours, not to mention the loss of farm production, which would send the world into a major famine. Yep well thought out green policy.

I'll tell you why caol and oil have not been phased, its the amount of energy concentrated per unit, there is nothing else that has that much concentrated energy that the general public is able to consume.

[PoliticalCitizen]

So.....now that you'vr solved torontos problem, whay about the western world where mass trasit isn't viable, and walking to work would take 12 hours, not to mention the loss of farm production, which would send the world into a major famine. Yep well thought out green policy.

London has introduced a tariff for driving into core downtown. Toronto has introduced an extra tax on vehicle registration. Things are already moving towards making driving downtown less of an option.

I never said people living outside of the city should stop driving or using tractors, combines etc. But maybe these methods of transportation could switch to a drive that doesn't generate emissions.

I'll tell you why caol and oil have not been phased, its the amount of energy concentrated per unit, there is nothing else that has that much concentrated energy that the general public is able to consume.

I believe in a few decades (hopefully no more than a couple) we'll be looking at an internal combustion engine for an automobile just like we're looking today at lighting candles. It is romantic but it also stinks.

[Alta4ever]

London has introduced a tariff for driving into core downtown. Toronto has introduced an extra tax on vehicle registration. Things are already moving towards making driving downtown less of an option.

I never said people living outside of the city should stop driving or using tractors, combines etc. But maybe these methods of transportation could switch to a drive that doesn't generate emissions.

I believe in a few decades (hopefully no more than a couple) we'll be looking at an internal combustion engine for an automobile just like we're looking today at lighting candles. It is romantic but it also stinks.

Like what bio diesel? yep we saw what happened with ethanol and what happened to the cost of food, and the publics reponse to that. Not to mention every acre of Canada switched over to production of canola, still wouldn't be enough to replace half of our fuel consumption. Its never going to happen.

We can even look at the effects of wind turbines on people

Wind turbines cause health problems, residents say

Windmills may be an environmentally friendly alternative energy source but they also cause debilitating health problems, say people who live near them.

Wind turbines are popping up in rural communities around the world, including Canada, in the hope that they will reduce reliance on coal and other sources for power. Currently, there are about 1,500 turbines across Canada and there are plans to build another 1,000 to 1,500 in the next year.

But some residents who live near wind farms complain the turbines cause a number of adverse health effects, such as crippling headaches, nose bleeds and a constant ringing in the ears.

CTV.ca News Staff

Helen and Bill Fraser initially supported the nearby wind farm in Melancthon, Ont. One turbine sat close to the Fraser's kitchen window.

"We thought, more green energy, this is great," Helen told CTV News.

However, Helen says she developed headaches, body aches and she had trouble sleeping. The dog began wetting the floor at night.

"There were nights I was lying in bed and my heart would beat to the pulse of the turbine. It was an uneasy feeling," Helen said.

Ernie Marshall at first supported the wind farm that was placed near his home near Goderich, Ont. However, he also says that once the turbines got rolling, his health began to suffer.

www.ctv.ca

The GP policy is nothing more than feel good policy for people, that will do nothing but cost Canadians huge dollars.

[PoliticalCitizen]

Like what bio diesel? yep we saw what happened with ethanol and what happened to the cost of food, and the publics reponse to that. Not to mention every acre of Canada switched over to production of canola, still wouldn't be enough to replace half of our fuel consumption. Its never going to happen.

No Alta, I meant burning NOTHING. As in electric vehicles. Or solar-powered. Or both. In the worst case scenario - burn hydrogen to produce water.

We can even look at the effects of wind turbines on people

www.ctv.ca

The GP policy is nothing more than feel good policy for people, that will do nothing but cost Canadians huge dollars.

Don't people complain about cell phones? pc monitors? etc. etc. etc.? People like complaining. I bet even Amish people will find tons to complain about...

[Mr.Canada]

Just because I support the Green Party doesn't mean I agree with every single thing they say and do.

I chose GP as the best of what we have (for me, of course).

I have my own views, some of which I shared with my Green candidate.

Burning coal is an insult to the last 200 years of tecnological evolution, its use should have ended with the second millenia.

Oil should be next one out the door, REGARDLESS of whehter CO2 is causing global warming or not.

Cars should be phased out next, with the urban architecture returning to human-centric from car-centric.

Not everyone wants to live in a big city. I hate the city.

It's dirty, has high crime, begging scum are everywhere, too many people who are rude, etc.

I go to Toronto maybe a few times a year now and when I do I park at Yorkdale and take the subway as it's faster.

Ban cars and trucks?

How do you expect to be able to buy ne dvds or pcs or any goods? How would it get to the store? I wonder how many would be out of work with your plan in place.

No more taxi cabs, no more truck drivers, no more buses. That's a lot of people not working. There'd be a huge revolt and Queens Park would burn down. Maybe that's what you want.

[madmax]

London has introduced a tariff for driving into core downtown. Toronto has introduced an extra tax on vehicle registration. Things are already moving towards making driving downtown less of an option.

London England, is 1) Socialist not GP. 2) The tax has not reduced traffic by any means. It has increased municipal revenues. 3) London England had the best subway, rail, and bus services long before the existence of the GP and long before the tax bonus. Infact municipal spending requires that people drive in the city or their revenues decline. The car tax is under review, as the government and the people recognise it for what it is.

Based on your writings, the only thing you should worry about in London is getting hit by a bus.

I never said people living outside of the city should stop driving

You are tripping over yourself, good thing you don't drive.

This is what you said.

Cars should be phased out next, with the urban architecture returning to human-centric from car-centric.

That is no cars. Cars phased out.

But maybe these methods of transportation could switch to a drive that doesn't generate emissions.

Seems your focus on emmissions ignores other pressures on the environment. While working on emmissions testing equipment, implemented by the BC NDP back in the 80s, I here in Ontario, spent as much time dealing with the environmental problems of batteries and their disposal. Batteries are still separated and charged extra fees. They are harmful to the environment.

One thing I used to like as a kid. Those cars in the cereal boxes that ran off elastic bands .

I believe in a few decades (hopefully no more than a couple) we'll be looking at an internal combustion engine for an automobile just like we're looking today at lighting candles. It is romantic but it also stinks.

There won't be automobiles. You banned them.

[jbg]

Education in this province (Ontario) has been dysfunctional for years. Being outdone by an American - shameful.

Especially an American who brings cross-country skis to Toronto in July.

[madmax]

Here is a treat for the Green Party.

They haven't even landed a seat yet, and they are already on their way to questionable financial escapades.

URL=http://www.570news.com/news/national/article.jsp?content=n102494A

remember, the GP do politics differently

Green official has salary garnisheed

October 24, 2008 - 16:50

By: Tim Naumetz, THE CANADIAN PRESS

OTTAWA - The executive director of the Green party has had his salary garnisheed by court order for a $172,000 claim from an investment dispute.

A spokesman for Green Leader Elizabeth May confirmed Friday the party earlier this month sent the first instalment from director Jim McDonald's salary to an Ottawa court sheriff after learning about the order in July.

McDonald and the spokesman told The Canadian Press the party was unaware of the garnishment order when the Greens hired him last year in an unusual dual-contract arrangement between the party, McDonald and a company owned by McDonald's wife.

Under one of the contracts, the party was obligated to pay McDonald $1 year as executive director while paying the company owned by his wife, Carol Day, $74,999 annually for the services McDonald would provide the party on behalf of his wife's company.

McDonald said in an interview Friday that the complicated arranged was not designed to duck the garnishment an Ontario Superior Court judge ordered in February 2006.

"No it wasn't," said McDonald.

I believe him

Edited October 25, 2008 by madmax

[Mr.Canada]

Here is a treat for the Green Party.

They haven't even landed a seat yet, and they are already on their way to questionable financial escapades.

URL=http://www.570news.com/news/national/article.jsp?content=n102494A

remember, the GP do politics differently

I believe him

Very interesting madmax. I wonder what the spin Monday will e about this. Should be entertaining at the very least.

[PoliticalCitizen]

London England, is 1) Socialist not GP. 2) The tax has not reduced traffic by any means. It has increased municipal revenues. 3) London England had the best subway, rail, and bus services long before the existence of the GP and long before the tax bonus. Infact municipal spending requires that people drive in the city or their revenues decline. The car tax is under review, as the government and the people recognise it for what it is.

Looks like you're having an interesting discussion with YOURSELF, as I never said the things you appear to be replying to.

Based on your writings, the only thing you should worry about in London is getting hit by a bus.

You are tripping over yourself, good thing you don't drive.

This is what you said.

That is no cars. Cars phased out.

OK, I meant to say no cars in the city, starting with downtown core.

Seems your focus on emmissions ignores other pressures on the environment. While working on emmissions testing equipment, implemented by the BC NDP back in the 80s, I here in Ontario, spent as much time dealing with the environmental problems of batteries and their disposal. Batteries are still separated and charged extra fees. They are harmful to the environment.

I agree. A recycling technology must be in place if batteries will become common.

One thing I used to like as a kid. Those cars in the cereal boxes that ran off elastic bands .

And I liked the solar-powered prototypes the most.

[PoliticalCitizen]

Not everyone wants to live in a big city. I hate the city.

It's dirty, has high crime, begging scum are everywhere, too many people who are rude, etc.

I go to Toronto maybe a few times a year now and when I do I park at Yorkdale and take the subway as it's faster.

Ban cars and trucks?

How do you expect to be able to buy ne dvds or pcs or any goods? How would it get to the store? I wonder how many would be out of work with your plan in place.

No more taxi cabs, no more truck drivers, no more buses. That's a lot of people not working. There'd be a huge revolt and Queens Park would burn down. Maybe that's what you want.

I didn't mean commercial vehicles delivering goods and picking up garbage (or any other commercial or municipal transportation).

[PoliticalCitizen]

Here is a treat for the Green Party.

They haven't even landed a seat yet, and they are already on their way to questionable financial escapades.

URL=http://www.570news.com/news/national/article.jsp?content=n102494A

remember, the GP do politics differently

I believe him

So they hired a crook. Big deal.

[madmax]

So they hired a crook. Big deal.

Why are you calling him a crook? Is this so obvious to you, that you might question those who run the GP?

Crooked people often seek out political parties of all stripes to get a personal advantage.

This person is the Executive Director. I don't believe I see any resignations in the story. You are suggesting that he is a crook. It is obvious to any person of integrity that something is up, when you ........

hire an Executive Director for $1.

and pay his wife $74,999 for his services.

This isn't normal business for people of integrity.

unusual dual-contract arrangement between the party, McDonald and a company owned by McDonald's wife.

This is very troubling for a party that has been around for close to 30 years and now has government funds to prop it up. Why did the people in charge engage in a type of money laundering to protect the Director from his legal responsibilities.

Wouldn't any reasonable person see RED FLAGS when the Director wants $1 and his wife paid the difference for his services? This proposal had alarm bells written all over it.

Green Washing.... A whole new spin in the rinse cycle.

No one benefits from downplaying the GP role in this scandalous practice. There should be multiple resignations.

Unless you are comfortable with the current director and those who agreed to his scheme?

[madmax]

Looks like you're having an interesting discussion with YOURSELF, as I never said the things you appear to be replying to.

These are your words.

London has introduced a tariff for driving into core downtown. Toronto has introduced an extra tax on vehicle registration. Things are already moving towards making driving downtown less of an option.

As London has had the tafiff for a number of years, to reflect that it has had no effect on vehicular traffic in the core, counters your argument about the effectiveness of the Tariff in reducing traffic. (Your Goal).

OK, I meant to say no cars in the city, starting with downtown core.

But that is not what you said. However, it is understood that you mean the city. One thing that is crystal clear from your posts, is that you want your Toronto Values, put ahead of the rest of Canada. You didn't say you want a car ban in Toronto. That can be done municipally. You are pitching a plan to ban cars in the city across Canada.

You are posting on a Federal Forum and you have not identified why cities should have such a ban? I do know of a smaller city which back in the 80s engaged in such a wonderful practice. They took out the roads, blocked the main arteries and even spent tonnes of money on a Downtown SHopping Mall. They created a road to bypass downtown traffic and divert it to the outskirts. But they did build a large downtown parking further away then the one located in the heart of the city. This new lot few used. The goal to reduce downtown traffic was a success.

This had the brilliant effect of Wiping out the downtown completely. I mean completely. The mall did not survive. The small businesses were wiped out. Infact, irony of irony the use public transit declined preciptiously, as there was no longer a need to go downtown. Even the bars didn't survive.

Ironically smaller village downtowns rely on the ability of the public to drive in from the country and park on the mainstreets which support the small independent business.

You have a Toronto Centric Approach, which may be well and good for Toronto. I don't know. But I do know that you might wish to travel this country. It is really large and diverse and cannot support a one size fits all approach.

I agree. A recycling technology must be in place if batteries will become common.

Batteries are common. There is one in every vehicle. Automotive is my background. The testing equipment I refered to earlier in this thread allows for this..., but hey that was when there were NDP Governments in BC and Ontario. These crazy practices were followed by both Progressive Conservatives, and Liberals in BC and Ontario, and every other mainstream party and every Province across Canada.

Most types of batteries can be recycled. However, some batteries are recycled more readily than others, such as lead-acid automotive batteries (nearly 90% are recycled)[6]

However in Toronto.....

Your View - Toronto

Battery Recycling

Wednesday, Mar. 12, 2008 | 09:00 AM AT

The city of Toronto is considering a proposal that will provide an incentive to recycle batteries,

Right now, the city says, only nine percent of batteries are ever recycled. Most end up in the garbage.

Factories, Dealerships and auto repair centres recycle all their batteries. Why are people in Toronto so out of touch?

The City I reside has many days where batteries are dropped off for recycling. It is very popular.

[bush_cheney2004]

....Factories, Dealerships and auto repair centres recycle all their batteries. Why are people in Toronto so out of touch?

The City I reside has many days where batteries are dropped off for recycling. It is very popular.

Yep....batteries from the automotive and transportation sector are the most successfully recycled product in North America. In the case of lead acid storage batteries, more than 98% are recycled.

[Alta4ever]

No Alta, I meant burning NOTHING. As in electric vehicles. Or solar-powered. Or both. In the worst case scenario - burn hydrogen to produce water.

Don't people complain about cell phones? pc monitors? etc. etc. etc.? People like complaining. I bet even Amish people will find tons to complain about...

Really where is the electricity going to come from? Solar powers is not a viable alterative and never will be, Nuclear? Yep just we need a waste product that has a 1000 year half life seaping into the ground water. Great alternatives.

[Smallc]

Really where is the electricity going to come from? Solar powers is not a viable alternative and never will be,

I wouldn't necessarily be so sure of that.

[Mr.Canada]

Nuclear power is the cleanest to produce and only gives of steam as an emission. GP supporters should really rally behind nuclear power. It just makes good sense.

[M.Dancer]

Yep....batteries from the automotive and transportation sector are the most successfully recycled product in North America. In the case of lead acid storage batteries, more than 98% are recycled.

Recycled, but not always in an environmentally sound way. There was a company in Toronto (and elsewhere) that recycled lead. They were compelled to clean up an entire neighbourhood whose soil had become toxic. This was over 25 years ago.

http://www.connexions.org/SevenNews/Docs/7...anadaMetals.htm

I met the owner years ago who told me that the contamination was pervasive, no amount of cleaning would remove the damage.

[Alta4ever]

Nuclear power is the cleanest to produce and only gives of steam as an emission. GP supporters should really rally behind nuclear power. It just makes good sense.

Really why not a mention of the nuclear waste and how long it has to be stored in a sealed tomb?

[Alta4ever]

Nuclear power is the cleanest to produce and only gives of steam as an emission. GP supporters should really rally behind nuclear power. It just makes good sense.

In fact it is even one of the least effeceint ways to produce electricity.

[Mr.Canada]

In fact it is even one of the least effeceint ways to produce electricity.

There aren't any better alternatives to produce the amount of power from 1 nuclear station.

[Alta4ever]

There aren't any better alternatives to produce the amount of power from 1 nuclear station.

So is it worth the risk? There are alternatives, clean coal, natural gas, garbage gassification to name a few. Nuclear power is not the answer it is suppose to be, it may not put more carboninto the atmosphere but it does leave other waste products that are far more damaging to the enviornment and impossible to clean up.

[Mr.Canada]

So is it worth the risk? There are alternatives, clean coal, natural gas, garbage gassification to name a few. Nuclear power is not the answer it is suppose to be, it may not put more carboninto the atmosphere but it does leave other waste products that are far more damaging to the enviornment and impossible to clean up.

I'm not saying it's perfect as it isn't. I too would like too see them use garbage too but they won't for whatever reason. Even if they did it couldn't replace the energy created by one nuke plant.