jbg Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Stop perpetuating myths. You've been shown many times that welfare and social assistance is not generous. You get a few hundred bucks a month ($530 for someone in Toronto). More to the point, a person is required to show that they have absolutely no means to survive and they're subjected to a thorough and intrusive financial audit before they're even considered for welfare. You're forgetting that health insurance covers regardless of someone's work status. That should correctly be considered a form of welfare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 You're forgetting that health insurance covers regardless of someone's work status. That should correctly be considered a form of welfare. Maybe in the USA, but not here. Welfare isn't a fed program here its provincial coverage. Apples don't equal oranges up here in the frozen chosen. Three layers of taxes from three levels of government, not including the entire sin tax batch of slaps upside the head. There may only be one tax payer but that guy is carved up like a Christmas turkey in Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) I see Bryan Mulroney finally got a vote. Where's one for Meaghan, Bennett or Mackenzie? After all, a river was named after the latter. Or for that matter Tupper, Diefenbaker, Campbell, Turner or Clark? Granted, they weren't on the list. But Paul Martin was, and he's voteless as well. If I had the choice to pick two, I would have added Borden to Harper. Edited January 2, 2012 by jbg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prairiechickin Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 I see Bryan Mulroney finally got a vote. Where's one for Meaghan, Bennett or Mackenzie? After all, a river was named after the latter. Or for that matter Tupper, Diefenbaker, Campbell, Turner or Clark? Granted, they weren't on the list. But Paul Martin was, and he's voteless as well. If I had the choice to pick two, I would have added Borden to Harper. Mulroney got a vote? Must have been Mila. As for Meighen and Bennett, both governed poorly through difficult times, I'm not surprised there's no love for them. As for Mackenzie, same name different guy, the river was named for the explorer. I don't think Tupper, Campbell, Turner or Clark lasted six months in office, hence its a little tough to make an argument for 'greatest'. I'm a little surprised Diefenbaker hasn't garnered a few votes. He won with the largest majority to date and was immensely popular for a time especially with the pro-monarchist bunch. But he'd pretty much worn out his welcome by the time he left office and most of the Blue Haired Ladies have died off by now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 I don't think Tupper, Campbell, Turner or Clark lasted six months in office, hence its a little tough to make an argument for 'greatest'. I'm a little surprised Diefenbaker hasn't garnered a few votes. He won with the largest majority to date and was immensely popular for a time especially with the pro-monarchist bunch. But he'd pretty much worn out his welcome by the time he left office and most of the Blue Haired Ladies have died off by now.Campbell's efforts, especially in Question Period, and excellent campaign were much appreciated by Canadians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 I see Bryan Mulroney finally got a vote. Where's one for Meaghan, Bennett or Mackenzie? After all, a river was named after the latter. Or for that matter Tupper, Diefenbaker, Campbell, Turner or Clark? Granted, they weren't on the list. But Paul Martin was, and he's voteless as well. If I had the choice to pick two, I would have added Borden to Harper. The fact Harper and Trudeau both got 18 votes while Sir John A Macdonald got 2 speaks to the lack of historical education and the youthfulness of this site's users. They know nothing of politics which happened before television. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 The fact Harper and Trudeau both got 18 votes while Sir John A Macdonald got 2 speaks to the lack of historical education and the youthfulness of this site's users. They know nothing of politics which happened before television. In my case not really. John A. Macdonald was a great, to be sure, but flawed. He was an alcoholic and there was serious corruption. As for others, King talked to his (dead) mother regularly, and hated Jews. "'Nuff" said? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 In my case not really. John A. Macdonald was a great, to be sure, but flawed. He was an alcoholic and there was serious corruption. As for others, King talked to his (dead) mother regularly, and hated Jews. "'Nuff" said? No. Not nuff said. We judge PMs on accomplishments, not their perceived morality. There was a lot of corruption everywhere in those days, and who cares if he drank? The fact is the man built this country, not to mention the railroad which became a national symbol and which helped expand the frontiers and tie that country together. What has Harper done anyway that compares to that? What did Trudeau accomplish other than quadrupling the federal budget, initiating a massive debt we are still labouring under, and bring in some social safety networks which were going to be brought in regardless of who was in power? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) What has Harper done anyway that compares to that? What did Trudeau accomplish other than quadrupling the federal budget, initiating a massive debt we are still labouring under, and bring in some social safety networks which were going to be brought in regardless of who was in power? Harper is undoing a lot of the grievous damage to Canada that Trudeau did.As for Macdonald, he helped establish the pattern that ultimately resulted in a badly divided country being created. In the U.S. the failure to address slavery was a similar "kick the can down the road" approach. Edited January 2, 2012 by jbg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prairiechickin Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 The fact Harper and Trudeau both got 18 votes while Sir John A Macdonald got 2 speaks to the lack of historical education and the youthfulness of this site's users. They know nothing of politics which happened before television. I've got to agree with you here. I can't see why anyone would vote for Harper at the moment, I'd like to see him govern with a majority for at least a term before I form an opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Harper is undoing a lot of the grievous damage to Canada that Trudeau did. As for Macdonald, he helped establish the patter that ultimately resulted in a badly divided country being created. In the U.S. the failure to address slavery was a similar "kick the can down the road" approach. The patter? Wth is patter? Define further, if you please. Harper has thus far accomplished little more than to run the boat fairly competently through rough waters. Trudeau didn't even accomplish that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 The patter? Wth is patter? Define further, if you please.Typo and fixed. Harper has thus far accomplished little more than to run the boat fairly competently through rough waters. Trudeau didn't even accomplish that much. Trudeau revolutionized Canada in a bad way. He took what was once an excellent civil service and Frenchified it at the expense of quality of government. He tried to turn Canada into a European-style social democracy, much as Obama is trying to do here. Thankfully Harper is undoing some of the damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayItLoud Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Harper and Trudeau? Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 What did Trudeau accomplish I mentioned a few things above but: the Official Languages Act, official multiculturalism, the abolition of the death penalty, the Immigration Act, adoption of the metric system, repatriation of the Constitution, the Charter of Rights, the CRTC, CIDA, progressive tax reform Whether you think these are good accomplishments is a matter of opinion but it seems absurd to me to claim that he didn't accomplish much. And, no, I do not think that most of these things would have happened regardless of who was in power. More than any other post-war PM, I believe that Trudeau himself defined his government's agenda. Trudeau did explicitly look to European social democracy as a model and did do quite a bit to emulate it, even after the tide had turned in the US and UK. There's no freaking way that Obama is doing anywhere near the same thing in the US. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/27/vote-obama-centrist-republican http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/07/22/Barack-Obama-The-Democrats-Richard-Nixon.aspx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 It makes a certain kind of sense that Trudeau and Harper are dominating this poll, actually, as I think they do represent the two visions of the country that are in conflict at the moment. I think jbg and I see this the same way, although we're on opposite sides of the debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) I've got to agree with you here. I can't see why anyone would vote for Harper at the moment, I'd like to see him govern with a majority for at least a term before I form an opinion. It's true that we don't know what history will write of Harper......but history is in the making right now. I can think of several things that are building Harper's legacy: 1) Steering the economy through the worst modern recession. It's not that he did so many things right - it's that he's done very few things wrong. 2) His decision on long-term, predictable funding for Healthcare will prove to be prescient. Instead of the decades-old squabbling over money - each province will have to look for solutions.....they can't hide behind "it's Ottawa's fault". Look for some innovative approaches over the next 5 years that will become common across Canada. 3) He will apply a pragmatic approach to Native concerns that will have an incremental, substantial and positive effect. We'll finally be moving forward. 4) He has proven that the Federal Government does not have to be held hostage by Quebec to win a majority. Quebecers have not yet embraced Harper but he has shown respect for them by recognizing the Quebecois as a nation "within a united Canada" - and he speaks in both languages - usually French first when speaking publicly. One could say it's a coincidence - but the fact is that support for separation has dropped steadily since Harper came to power. 5) Slowly but surely, he is rebuilding Canada's sense of self - recognizing our history, re-enforcing our values. Surely people have recognized how Canadian history has all but disappeared from school carriculums. How many kids know about Vimy Ridge and the sacrifices of WWI and WWII. How about all of our Prime Ministers (this poll is a good example of the lack of knowledge). How about British history upon which our institutions are based. New Canadians are learning more about our country's history through the revised immigration policy. Edited January 2, 2012 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 WOOHOOO Boster Club!!!!! clearly, the poll has been/is being freeped! Trust in the Blogging Tories... and PMO staffers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 5) Slowly but surely, he is rebuilding Canada's sense of self - recognizing our history, re-enforcing our values. Surely people have recognized how Canadian history has all but disappeared from school carriculums. How many kids know about Vimy Ridge and the sacricies of WWI and WWII. let's not forget Libya!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 ....5) Slowly but surely, he is rebuilding Canada's sense of self - recognizing our history, re-enforcing our values. Surely people have recognized how Canadian history has all but disappeared from school carriculums. How many kids know about Vimy Ridge and the sacricies of WWI and WWII. How about all of our Prime Ministers (this poll is a good example of the lack of knowledge). How about British history upon which our institutions are based. New Canadians are learning more about our country's history through the revised immigration policy. Anything that PM Harper can do to battle such willful and politically motivated ignorance about Canadian domestic and foreign policy is welcomed indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukin Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 clearly, the poll has been/is being freeped! Trust in the Blogging Tories... and PMO staffers! Boo hoo from baby waldo. Anything walnut doesn't agree with is rigged. What a joker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Boo hoo from baby waldo. Anything walnut doesn't agree with is rigged. What a joker. whatever my personal views on Harper, it is most unrealistic to choose him at this stage... he has no/few significant accomplishments. All we've ever heard from Harper partisans is, 'just wait until he has his majority'. Well... he has it now. Let's see what he actually accomplishes. Certainly, he has no significant legacy that supports the poll numbers, rigged or not. My earlier comment to cybercoma still stands... if possible, alter the poll to reveal just who voted. Clearly we'd see just where all these johnny-come lately votes are registering from, hey? just so we're clear, I no more care about the poll numbers other than to mock the run-up and those so intent on laying claim to Dear Leaders rightful place! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted January 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 Only the forum administrator can see the results. I made it an anonymous poll and you can't go back and change it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jefferiah Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) Certainly, he has no significant legacy that supports the poll numbers, rigged or not. My earlier comment to cybercoma still stands... if possible, alter the poll to reveal just who voted. Clearly we'd see just where all these johnny-come lately votes are registering from, hey? How do you know these are newly registered members? What do you base this on? There are a fair number of conservative leaning posters here, and 20 votes is not really all that much. For better or worse, it would seem that most people on either "side" have decided to cast their votes for fairly recent PMs. So you have a race between Trudeau and Harper. Edited January 2, 2012 by jefferiah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 2, 2012 Report Share Posted January 2, 2012 (edited) I mentioned a few things above but: the Official Languages Act, official multiculturalism, the abolition of the death penalty, the Immigration Act, adoption of the metric system, repatriation of the Constitution, the Charter of Rights, the CRTC, CIDA, progressive tax reform Whether you think these are good accomplishments is a matter of opinion but it seems absurd to me to claim that he didn't accomplish much. And, no, I do not think that most of these things would have happened regardless of who was in power. More than any other post-war PM, I believe that Trudeau himself defined his government's agenda. Everything he did, aside from the official languages act, which has itself accomplished nothing of substance, has been done at around the same time in every other western nation save the US. Trudeau simply adopted what everyone else was adopting. If Trudeau hadn't done it someone else would have. Neverthless, I'm not suggesting Trudeau was completely bereft of influence. All I'm saying is that he didn't create a nation like John A Macodonald did. As for Harper. I voted for the man and likely will again. But he's accomplished nothing thus far of lasting significance. It doesn't help that his majority coincides with a long, deep, worldwide recession, which severely limits his options, of course. Edited January 2, 2012 by Scotty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 3, 2012 Report Share Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) As for Harper. I voted for the man and likely will again. You voted for Harper? You mean you live in Calgary Southwest riding. Edited January 3, 2012 by jbg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.