CanadaRocks Posted May 28, 2004 Report Share Posted May 28, 2004 Canadian Action Party I've seen some views and alternatives from this bunch that aren't offered by our traditional "Top Three." Has anyone else had a look at them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted May 28, 2004 Report Share Posted May 28, 2004 Paul Hellyer's old/new thingy. Paul Hellyer made money as a developer in Ontario (and so the story goes, he sold houses without basements). Then he went into politics as a Liberal. He ran for the leadership against Trudeau in 1968. He was a bad loser so he left the Liberals and set up his own party. This party is the remnants. I think it's fair to say that Hellyer was a bit of a flake. Rent this DVD and watch the included documentary on the 1968 Liberal leadership race. It captures all the drama of a turning point in Canadian history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadaRocks Posted May 29, 2004 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2004 I think it's fair to say that Hellyer was a bit of a flake. I think it's fair to say whatever he may or may not have been, some of the things he says seem very logical. Take for example the Canadian Action Parties policy on Money. CAP Policy on Money Of particular interest concerning this policy is that it's roots sprout from Abraham Lincoln's thoughts on the same issue. Not being an economist myself, perhaps someone can explain exactly why the money policy mentioned is not a valid possibility? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idealisttotheend Posted May 29, 2004 Report Share Posted May 29, 2004 Shades of social credit? Mr. Hellyer doesn't propose how to control how much or little money is printed though so I think that would be a key question, can't have the right print no money and the left print too much. It is interesting though, I mean we are about to run into the problem of not being able to 'sell' any more debt and then there will be major problems given the technification of the workforce. Interesting also that 1974 was about the same time the federal government started to rack up the famous national debt (due to OPEC of course). But I wonder if there is any relation between the two? Mr. Hellyer has always made a lot of sense to me, when I have paid attention (I fear August will have some examples but just from what I've heard/read he's not that flakey). He's always been a "damn the torpedoes" (excuse the pun) nationalist, if not all that realistic vis a vie the party system. The left wing party we have can't be seen as electable (and is losing some votes to the Greens). I don't see the use of the CAP unless it replaces the NDP, or the Liberals go the way of the Kim Cambell Tories which I don't see happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavik44 Posted May 29, 2004 Report Share Posted May 29, 2004 I have looked at them, even got there site bookmarked, mind you i got the NDP bookmarked as well. However it is nice to see a left wing party commited to having a millitary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 How many ridings did that party win in the following elections?: January 2006 October 2008 May 2011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 How many ridings did that party win in the following elections?: January 2006 October 2008 May 2011 None. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 None. clearly, we are on hold... waiting for MLW member jbg to enlighten all as to why he resurrected an 8 year old thread - oh my! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 clearly, we are on hold... waiting for MLW member jbg to enlighten all as to why he resurrected an 8 year old thread - oh my! Someone else linked to this thread in the "Ignatieff" thread and it looked like fun to post to. I think you take your posting duties way too seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 Someone else linked to this thread in the "Ignatieff" thread and it looked like fun to post to. I think you take your posting duties way too seriously. fun! Seriously? Perhaps I take your described 'posting duties' less... seriously... than your expectations everyone reads all threads. oh wait, I just checked it out - some guy threw the link up to support his tired "flake" refrain targeting his equally dated 2004 post about Paul Hellyer... which, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with the obscure CAP party and your resurrected, 'for fun post' about CAP party wins over the 2006/2008/2011 elections. Seriously! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 fun! Seriously? Perhaps I take your described 'posting duties' less... seriously... than your expectations everyone reads all threads. oh wait, I just checked it out - some guy threw the link up to support his tired "flake" refrain targeting his equally dated 2004 post about Paul Hellyer... which, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with the obscure CAP party and your resurrected, 'for fun post' about CAP party wins over the 2006/2008/2011 elections. Seriously! What a waste of time. I didn't check the dates as I was reading this, so thanks for pointing that out! Talk about "flakey"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted March 16, 2012 Report Share Posted March 16, 2012 What a waste of time. I didn't check the dates as I was reading this, so thanks for pointing that out! Talk about "flakey"... I don't understand what on earth you're babbling about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MACKER Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 (edited) This Content is Not Available in Your Country The content of this page may be blocked in Canada for allegedly infringing on copyrights, under the Copyright Modernization Act. Or maybe you just clicked to a page that doesn't exist anymore... .... Just a first glance it seems a move in the right direction but it looks like the measures don't go as far as the Social Platform, I'm liking some of what I'm seeing though. "Bank of Canada Policy A re-empowered Bank of Canada is critical for the survival of Canada as an independent and sovereign nation." I'm all for refocusing the central bank but it needs to be part of a complete overhall. Organize the public service like a bank and offer it as a public bank. " The Bank of Canada, unlike the Federal Reserve in the U.S., is wholly owned by the people of Canada. It was nationalized in 1938 and was used very successfully to fund infrastructure, social programs, education, etc, for the benefit of all Canadians. It was used to bring us out of the depression, funded WWII, to build highways such as the McDonald-Cartier freeway, public transportation systems, subway lines, airports, the St. Lawrence Seaway, our universal healthcare system and our Canada Pension Plan." We should be delving out EI and National Health Inusurance and CPP to services offered by a public bank. Allowing private banks to compete with these programs provided the programs are secure. "We must return to the Bank of Canada for a minimum of 50% of Government-created money (GCM). It is essential to maintaining our sovereignty (our monetary system must not be in the complete control of the private bankers and corporate elites." I don't understand why money needs to return to the bank if you can just make more and adjust based on inflation? People won't be enticed to hold the funds if their value is dropping heavily. It will encourage economic exchange from cash to hard goods like gold heating fuel and food for the bunker. " Fund new infrastructure (roads, bridges, hospitals, schools) could be built at a fraction of the cost because of reduced interest costs." We should let private industry take care of these things, we already have enough, there should only be a maximum of say 5% investment into these things because that is the growth rate. But it isn't federal except for ports and major highways, and these should be paid for with user fees. "Lend to provinces and municipalities at near or zero interest with the proviso that they maintain a certain level and quality of healthcare, housing and education. That means lower property taxes for all." DO NOT LEND MONEY TO ANYONE. DO NOT BORROW MONEY FROM ANYONE.. MAKE IT AND EARN IT. Improve our universal health care system, reducing wait times and removing public-private partnerships. It is a proven fact that public healthcare systems are more efficient than private ones because profit is not the motive. This is a provincial issue, the feds should offer a national health insurance plan though. Ensure that our public school systems and teachers are equipped with all that is necessary to bring forth future generations of well informed, well-rounded, well-educated adults capable of critical thinking. Provincial issue but the government should offer content for heritage and langauges, and other "essential" civics and legal informations and content. Lower and/or subsidize university tuitions so that all citizens would have an opportunity to attend institutions of higher learning should they wish, without ending up in the poor house. Alleviate the suffering of the poor, homeless, drug-addicted and mentally challenged. Invest in green technologies to save our environment. Invest in the family farm and new agricultural technologies that would eventually benefit all citizens. University students should fund the future university studnets free education through an alumni fee so that the more graduates there are the more can attend. But based on how many full years of free education. It should be eased in from the lowest tutition.. creating a cieling of funding that increases as the alumni fund increases. "Ensure that a minimum of 50% of new money supply would be GCM on which not interest is paid (an increase from less than 5% currently)." Fiscal policies need to be brought into accord, and there should be a shift from taxation to inflation to cover costs. Credits should just be cut completely. People should be investing in commodities not cash if they want booked assets. "Amend the Bank Act requiring banks and other deposit taking institutions to maintain statutory cash reserves with the Bank of Canada." I don't agree with this one, I just think they should make it fraud if they can't pay out. And people who put money into banks should have plain language contracts indicating how their money can and cannot be used. Edited March 19, 2012 by MACKER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 Has anyone else had a look at them? I just did and was almost immediately turned off. Loss-of-sovereignty conspiracy theories, more (but no exact details on how much) referenda, complete absence of government secrecy, Senate reform that essentially makes a duplicate House of Commons. Nah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.