Enjoy the hockey game, Mr Harper or

[msj]

PMs have the freedom to have lives too. He makes over 300k last I checked, he should be able to attend an out-of-town hockey game on that salary. If Harper wants to go to a game in Boston but security requirements forbid him from travelling commercially, then he has to take the private jet. Don't be bitter because you're not important enough to be forbidden from flying commercial airlines.

I'm not bitter.

But, as a taxpayer, I prefer my leader to watch out for my interests even at the expense of his own interests.

He knows full well that it is going to cost us hard working taxpayers money to pay for the Challenger to get him and his security detail to the game.

It's going to cost us taxpayers money for the security detail to attend the game too.

He chooses to have us taxpayers pay this bill so that he can get a personal benefit.

Exactly how this makes me a "left" winger is beyond me.

Seems more like a "right" wing thing to expect our politicians to not receive undue personal benefits at the expense of taxpayers.

[CPCFTW]

I'm not bitter.

But, as a taxpayer, I prefer my leader to watch out for my interests even at the expense of his own interests.

He knows full well that it is going to cost us hard working taxpayers money to pay for the Challenger to get him and his security detail to the game.

It's going to cost us taxpayers money for the security detail to attend the game too.

He chooses to have us taxpayers pay this bill so that he can get a personal benefit.

Exactly how this makes me a "left" winger is beyond me.

Seems more like a "right" wing thing to expect our politicians to not receive undue personal benefits at the expense of taxpayers.

Every PM has had the right to a personal life and the right to travel outside of Ottawa for non-business reasons. The position demands that his personal life be subject to security. It is a left wing thing because it only matters when the left have lost an election. They feign indignation to the election results, the electoral system, and even the right for the PM to have a life when things don't go their way. It's pathetic.

How do you think PMs visit their families? Do you think they hitchhike across Canada to save the taxpayer money? This is a ridiculous non-story and if you can't see that, you are a lefty.

Edited June 9, 2011 by CPCFTW

[msj]

Every PM has had the right to a personal life and the right to travel outside of Ottawa for non-business reasons. The position demands that his personal life be subject to security. It is a left wing thing because it only matters when the left have lost an election. They feign indignation to the election results, the electoral system, and even the right for the PM to have a life when things don't go their way. It's pathetic.

How do you think PMs visit their families? Do you think they hitchhike across Canada to save the taxpayer money? This is a ridiculous non-story and if you can't see that, you are a lefty.

So you think it's okay for Chretien to have used the Challenger jets for personal use (say, attending a golf game as suggested by Saipan above)?

And if I complained about that, then I suppose you would accuse me of being a right winger because it was a right "wing thing because it only matters when the left

have lost an election."

I mean, seriously, this is the best you can come up with?

As for visiting families - yeah I have no problem with that as long as they aren't visiting their fourth cousin every month. I.e. as long as it is reasonable.

I don't think it is reasonable for our PM to attend a playoff hockey game at a time that they are talking about austerity.

I also wouldn't like it even if we had a surplus (aka taxpayers paying too much taxes).

Which brings me back again to exactly how am I sounding like a "left" winger on this issue?

Edited June 9, 2011 by msj

[PIK]

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/06/09/mps-defend-their-804-million-in-pension-benefits-but-attack-pm-over-hockey-ticket/

Well read this , this is what we should be upset about, not harper going to boston for a game. The man deserves to get out once in a while being PM ,you get perks and that is one of them as long that he does not make a habit of it.

[msj]

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/06/09/mps-defend-their-804-million-in-pension-benefits-but-attack-pm-over-hockey-ticket/

Well read this , this is what we should be upset about, not harper going to boston for a game. The man deserves to get out once in a while being PM ,you get perks and that is one of them as long that he does not make a habit of it.

Nice headline in the link: MPs defend their $804 million in pension benefits, but attack PM over hockey ticket

I'm not an MP.

I'm a taxpayer which means that not only do I get to complain about Harper wasting my tax dollars for his undue personal benefit but I also get to complain about the excessive pensions for MP's.

Once again, how do such complaints make me "left" wing?

[msj]

Harper is being historic in reimbursing us for personal travel and kudos for that.

However, why is he reimbursing us only $530 per flight ticket when a last minute flight costs $2,600.

Very nice.

Oh, and Mr. Harper - you're welcome.

[CPCFTW]

So you think it's okay for Chretien to have used the Challenger jets for personal use (say, attending a golf game as suggested by Saipan above)?

And if I complained about that, then I suppose you would accuse me of being a right winger because it was a right "wing thing because it only matters when the left

have lost an election."

I mean, seriously, this is the best you can come up with?

As for visiting families - yeah I have no problem with that as long as they aren't visiting their fourth cousin every month. I.e. as long as it is reasonable.

I don't think it is reasonable for our PM to attend a playoff hockey game at a time that they are talking about austerity.

I also wouldn't like it even if we had a surplus (aka taxpayers paying too much taxes).

Which brings me back again to exactly how am I sounding like a "left" winger on this issue?

So you think the PM should be able to visit his family but not attend a hockey game outside of Ottawa? The PM's personal life should pass the MSJ litmus test?

The only point Saipan was making about Chretien is that this kind of stuff has never been an issue before. Now that Harper is the leader, the PM shouldn't be allowed to travel for personal reasons because his position forbids using commercial airlines?

So let's say Harper is PM for another 8 years (wins next election), you think he should be forbidden from travelling for personal reasons outside of visiting close relatives for 13 years? Since he is PM, he can only travel via private jet with a security detail, therefore you are arguing that he should be forbidden from personal travel for 9-13 years unless it is to visit close relatives. Is this really your position?

I wonder if Obama books a flight on American Airlines whenever he wants to catch a White Sox game...

I already explained how this makes you a lefty. Being a sore loser and complaining about nonsense because your guy lost.

[CPCFTW]

Harper is being historic in reimbursing us for personal travel and kudos for that.

However, why is he reimbursing us only $530 per flight ticket when a last minute flight costs $2,600.

Very nice.

Oh, and Mr. Harper - you're welcome.

It truly is historic. We are lucky to have a PM like this.

I have a hypothetical for you. Let's say you were interviewing for a position in which you were privy to top secret classified information and were paid a nice salary of $300,000. You received an offer, however, as part of your contract, you are forbidden from travelling on commercial airlines for security reasons and you have to always use a company supplied private jet. The jet would cost $10,000/hr to use. You anticipate working in this position for 15 years. Would you take the position? What if you were told that you had to pay the $10,000/hr whenever you wanted to travel for personal reasons? Your expected income could quite possibly be negative. One round trip visit to China for personal reasons might take up an entire year's salary. It's such a ridiculous argument it can only originate from a lefty.

[msj]

So you think the PM should be able to visit his family but not attend a hockey game outside of Ottawa? The PM's personal life should pass the MSJ litmus test?

Not my litmus test. The taxpayers.

This stinks of corruption to me. An undue personal benefit paid for by taxpayers.

The only point Saipan was making about Chretien is that this kind of stuff has never been an issue before. Now that Harper is the leader, the PM shouldn't be allowed to travel for personal reasons because his position forbids using commercial airlines?

I don't recall if it was an issue or not. I suppose Chretien pulling golf balls out of his brief case doesn't count, huh?

I don't see how this line of reasoning goes: well, he (Chretien) did this and no one complained so now he (Harper) can do this and you have no right to complain.

Honestly, is that even a position one can take?

You don't see just how foolish this position is?

So let's say Harper is PM for another 8 years (wins next election), you think he should be forbidden from travelling for personal reasons outside of visiting close relatives for 13 years? Since he is PM, he can only travel via private jet with a security detail, therefore you are arguing that he should be forbidden from personal travel for 9-13 years unless it is to visit close relatives. Is this really your position?

No, I think he should travel for vacation purposes as appropriate.

I suppose he can argue that this is one of those times which is fair enough.

If he pursues that line of reasoning then the only problem I have with it is that he did not reimburse us for the cost of a last minute ticket. He is paying us $530 per air ticket rather than the going rate of $2,600.

And, no, just because Chretien did not pay anything does not excuse Harper.

Times have changed and taxpayers and media are more critical which leads to positive changes such as our PM reimbursing taxpayers for his own personal costs (however nominal the amount may be).

I wonder if Obama books a flight on American Airlines whenever he wants to catch a White Sox game...

Honestly, how is this relevant?

This is not he US.

You are not forming a coherent argument by pointing out how bad other governments are.

I expect my government to be better than other leaders and let those countries (and taxpayers) complain on their own account.

I already explained how this makes you a lefty. Being a sore loser and complaining about nonsense because your guy lost.

I don't have a "guy."

None of the points you have brought up make any kind of rational sense.

No, really.

[msj]

It truly is historic. We are lucky to have a PM like this.

I have a hypothetical for you. Let's say you were interviewing for a position in which you were privy to top secret classified information and were paid a nice salary of $300,000. You received an offer, however, as part of your contract, you are forbidden from travelling on commercial airlines for security reasons and you have to always use a company supplied private jet. The jet would cost $10,000/hr to use. You anticipate working in this position for 15 years. Would you take the position? What if you were told that you had to pay the $10,000/hr whenever you wanted to travel for personal reasons? Your expected income could quite possibly be negative. One round trip visit to China for personal reasons might take up an entire year's salary. It's such a ridiculous argument it can only originate from a lefty.

This is what is called a non sequitur.

[CPCFTW]

Not my litmus test. The taxpayers.

This stinks of corruption to me. An undue personal benefit paid for by taxpayers.

I don't recall if it was an issue or not. I suppose Chretien pulling golf balls out of his brief case doesn't count, huh?

I don't see how this line of reasoning goes: well, he (Chretien) did this and no one complained so now he (Harper) can do this and you have no right to complain.

Honestly, is that even a position one can take?

You don't see just how foolish this position is?

No, I think he should travel for vacation purposes as appropriate.

I suppose he can argue that this is one of those times which is fair enough.

If he pursues that line of reasoning then the only problem I have with it is that he did not reimburse us for the cost of a last minute ticket. He is paying us $530 per air ticket rather than the going rate of $2,600.

And, no, just because Chretien did not pay anything does not excuse Harper.

Times have changed and taxpayers and media are more critical which leads to positive changes such as our PM reimbursing taxpayers for his own personal costs (however nominal the amount may be).

Honestly, how is this relevant?

This is not he US.

You are not forming a coherent argument by pointing out how bad other governments are.

I expect my government to be better than other leaders and let those countries (and taxpayers) complain on their own account.

I don't have a "guy."

None of the points you have brought up make any kind of rational sense.

No, really.

The PM is entitled to travel for personal reasons just like the rest of us. His position requires that he take a taxpayer funded private jet for security reasons. If you can't understand why your complaint is asinine and ridiculous yet, then I don't think I can help you.

[Sandy MacNab]

Nice headline in the link: MPs defend their $804 million in pension benefits, but attack PM over hockey ticket

I'm not an MP.

I'm a taxpayer which means that not only do I get to complain about Harper wasting my tax dollars for his undue personal benefit but I also get to complain about the excessive pensions for MP's.

Once again, how do such complaints make me "left" wing?

At the very least it makes you sound like a Liberal.

[msj]

The PM is entitled to travel for personal reasons just like the rest of us. His position requires that he take a taxpayer funded private jet for security reasons. If you can't understand why your complaint is asinine and ridiculous yet, then I don't think I can help you.

Your arguments are without merit which is why you slip into non sequiturs and other types of garbage (right/left crap, for instance).

Yes, of course Harper is entitled to vacation time.

And, as such, he should reimburse taxpayers for the real, last minute, cost of this vacation since, at best, that is what he has done.

I think this is the point - Chretien could fly to Florida to golf on vacation all he wanted (well, within reason, not every other week) as long as he paid an equivalent commercial ticket price.

So, if he had vacation booked for August 1998 I won't begrudge him taking the plane and security detail and he should have paid for a commercial ticket.

Harper has brought us forward by paying for a commercial ticket but it appears to be under priced.

If he ups his reimbursement and takes this time out of vacation then I'm fine with it.

Better yet, if he were to lay down some rules and guidelines for vacation and reimbursement of personal travel then I would be very happy.

Once again, how does this make me a left winger?

[msj]

At the very least it makes you sound like a Liberal.

Really, so the Reform party never complained about MP pensions?

[RNG]

Really, so the Reform party never complained about MP pensions?

Talk about moving the goalposts, how the hell does pensions have anything to do with a hockey game?

[msj]

Talk about moving the goalposts, how the hell does pensions have anything to do with a hockey game?

It was brought into the thread by PIK at post #54.

See his link for which I commented on it at post #55.

--------------------

Maybe if you guys paid attention you would have legitimate lines of discussion rather than "you're just a hater sore loser lefty blah blah blah."

[PIK]

After talking to some one that was a member of the 412, he said it is more closer to 3000/hr. But who cares,was he hobnobbing with the rich and famous, no he and his daughter went to a hockey game.

Edited June 9, 2011 by PIK

[RNG]

It was brought into the thread by PIK at post #54.

See his link for which I commented on it at post #55.

--------------------

Maybe if you guys paid attention you would have legitimate lines of discussion rather than "you're just a hater sore loser lefty blah blah blah."

So because PIK cause some thread drift, you are blameless?

[PIK]

It was brought into the thread by PIK at post #54.

See his link for which I commented on it at post #55.

--------------------

Maybe if you guys paid attention you would have legitimate lines of discussion rather than "you're just a hater sore loser lefty blah blah blah."

I put it there to show how these pigs at the trough are acting over this.

[msj]

After talking to some one that was a member of the 412, he said it is more closer to 3000/hr. But who cares,was he hobnobbing with the rich and famous, no he and his daughter went to a hockey game.

Out of curiosity, what are this guys credentials for estimating the hourly cost of the jet?

[PIK]

Out of curiosity, what are this guys credentials for estimating the hourly cost of the jet?

He was a pilot, now is he right I don't know ,that is what he told me, but try and find any reference to the 10g's per hour.

[msj]

So because PIK cause some thread drift, you are blameless?

I don't think it is unrelated as I have already posted above.

As a taxpayer I don't like to see politicians (of any stripe) get undue personal benefits.

Whether that is through a pension system that stinks or through not reimbursing or under reimbursing personal costs (and, therefore, receiving an undue personal benefit) is only different by the dollar figures involved.

In fact, even the link PIK linked to is fine.

My issue is that one can rightfully complain about both the pensions and the hockey flight without any need for the typical ad hominem attacks of being a "left" winger.

[msj]

He was a pilot, now is he right I don't know ,that is what he told me, but try and find any reference to the 10g's per hour.

Um, how about looking at the link in the first post?

Granted, I don't know who came up with that estimate but I certainly won't take a pilot's estimate.

I know enough pilots to know better.

[msj]

I put it there to show how these pigs at the trough are acting over this.

Fair enough.

I do think it is a legitimate point to point out that I'm not an MP and I don't like seeing "pigs" eating my taxpayer dollars with their pensions nor with personal benefits accruing to them by flying to a hockey game.

I also would like someone to explain to me how, exactly, making this point in any way makes me a "hater/sore loser/lefty?"

[RNG]

Fair enough.

I do think it is a legitimate point to point out that I'm not an MP and I don't like seeing "pigs" eating my taxpayer dollars with their pensions nor with personal benefits accruing to them by flying to a hockey game.

I also would like someone to explain to me how, exactly, making this point in any way makes me a "hater/sore loser/lefty?"

I'm too new to this site to know what you did when the Liberals were in power. If you complained equally about their porkies, then fine. But if your newfound outrage just showed up since Harper is in the big chair, that makes you a lefty. That's all CPCFTW is saying.