dre Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 A decade? Weren't the Liberals out of power for six years? And isnt 6 years "most of a decade"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 Isn't that exactly what we have now? In some cases. But we are also seeing some of the most abhorant legislation in Canadian history. The Omnibus crime built is outrageous... doubling down on the failed war on drugs is both horrendous social policy, and horrendous economic policy. There attempts to lock down the internet are disgusting as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 In some cases. But we are also seeing some of the most abhorant legislation in Canadian history. The Omnibus crime built is outrageous... doubling down on the failed war on drugs is both horrendous social policy, and horrendous economic policy. There attempts to lock down the internet are disgusting as well. I agree 100% with the war on drugs comment. A complete and utter failure. The only way to fight drugs is to legalize and regulate them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 (edited) Except that Alberta was well run. Klein fixed alberta's books on 20 dollar oil and a weak dollar. All one needs to do is look at alberta's books. You don't last 40 years in govt without doing something right. klein was an idiot, huge cash giveaway's, cronyism, he nearly destroyed the healthcare system(it still hasn't recovered)...alberta survives despite incompetent mangement, it's the natural oil wealth that keeps us afloat...a dozen drunken monkeys l could have done as well running the provinces finances(or one drunken idiot)...compare alberta's pension/heritage funds to norways,... similar population, similar quality of life/standard of living/education, both oil and gas rich but alberta easily leads in other resources, Norway has its' own military to support ....alberta -$15.9 billion but norway has put aside a staggering $550 billion... alberta has been led by financial idiots and Klein was just one of many.. Edited November 23, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 klein was an idiot, huge cash giveaway's, cronyism, he nearly destroyed the healthcare system(it still hasn't recovered)...alberta survives despite incompetent mangement, it's the natural oil wealth that keeps us afloat...a dozen drunken monkeys l could have done as well running the provinces finances(or one drunken idiot)... compare alberta's pension/heritage funds to norways,... similar population, similar quality of life/standard of living/education, both oil and gas rich but alberta easily leads in other resources, Norway has its' own military to support ....alberta -$15.9 billion but norway has put aside a staggering $550 billion... alberta has been led by financial idiots and Klein was just one of many.. Of course, Norway didn't have the ROC to send money to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 Of course, Norway didn't have the ROC to send money to. You don't think Norway is divided into administrative units similar to provinces? They do. But they have a national oil plan, unlike Canada. They also have oil companies that are at least partially owned by the state. You think 97% of oil revenues are sent to the ROC? You are completely wrong. That's the whole point. Alberta benefits, but they have given oil companies a free ride essentially. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 The comparison doesn't hold up, I agree. Province versus country, and all that. But I read somewhere that Alberta had given something like 150 billion dollars to the ROC since the sixties. With interest, that would be quite the nest egg. I'm not saying they wouldn't have spent it all on smarties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 Good old Justin you can always count on him to say something stupid that drives a wedge between Canadians. I can not believe the Liberals the party of Canadian unity would want him to lead. I guess the Liberals are a shell of what they once were and are now a regional party anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 The comparison doesn't hold up, I agree. Province versus country, and all that. But I read somewhere that Alberta had given something like 150 billion dollars to the ROC since the sixties. With interest, that would be quite the nest egg. I'm not saying they wouldn't have spent it all on smarties. Yah did you read that? What did you read about Canada and how much it cost to build Alberta? Tell me about that and interest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 Yah did you read that? What did you read about Canada and how much it cost to build Alberta? Tell me about that and interest? I didn't read anything about that. It wasn't mentioned in the article I read. I'm sure it's very interesting though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 I didn't read anything about that. It wasn't mentioned in the article I read. I'm sure it's very interesting though. I bet it would be. I got good news for Alberta, the rest of Canada loves them and we will still be here when the oil runs out and they are just like the East when the Fish ran out. We will help them recover when all the oil companies leave their province I promise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 (edited) Of course, Norway didn't have the ROC to send money to. of coarse alberta is much wealthier in resources and doesn't have military to support... Norway didn't begin it's pension fund until 1996 so in 16 yrs Norway's built up a fund of 550 billion alberta began it's heritage fund in 1976.... alberta's contribution to equalization fund comes no where near the amount of norway's pension fund total...if alberta averaged 3.5 billion a year in equalization payments since 1996 it still only amounts to 56 billion, what was that Norway pension fund? oh yeah $550 billion in 16 years.....there's no getting around it Alberta's record of financial management sucks... Edited November 23, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 The comparison doesn't hold up, I agree. Province versus country, and all that. But I read somewhere that Alberta had given something like 150 billion dollars to the ROC since the sixties. With interest, that would be quite the nest egg. I'm not saying they wouldn't have spent it all on smarties. ya the comparison indeed doesn't hold up it's less expensive to run a province than a country...norways population 4.9 million, alberta 3.8 million 20% fewer people... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 because it was a quote bearing the name trudeau name no red neck albertan would even read it, these people aren't dealing from a full deck... Gee, and there I was wondering why you didn't find Trudeau's remarks problematic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 Dissing Albertans will get you more votes in BC.... not less. The BC types who rant about Alberta because of it's oil are the ones who never vote Tory anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 Agreed. In fact, dissing Alberta doesn't lose you votes anywhere in Canada... other than Alberta where it's a moot point anyway. I love how all you liberals assume that everyone else disapproves of Alberta because they have oil you don't like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 23, 2012 Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 The reason why the Tories made this statement appear is the byelection is very close for the Libs and the Tories and so, its all about politics and they don't really care or they would have brought this up when he said it. Think people. The Tories haven't done anything. I love how you make a statement of fact without a shred of evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 In some cases. But we are also seeing some of the most abhorant legislation in Canadian history. The Omnibus crime built is outrageous... doubling down on the failed war on drugs is both horrendous social policy, and horrendous economic policy. There attempts to lock down the internet are disgusting as well. Most of the people of this country approve of most of the elements of the crime bill. And the internet bill was requested by the provinces. Including Liberal and NDP provinces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 I'm offended by Trudeau's arrogance for several reasons. The first is it exhibits that massive ego so many of the pseudo-intellectuals of the left hold, a preening fondness for their own imagined nobility. Second, it presumes a sense of entitlement on the part of Quebecers to run Canada. Third, it sounds awfully like the Quebec-first governments run by his father, Mulroney and Chretien. They poured money in every imaginable way into Quebec, money taken from the rest of Canada, yet evidenced no great loyalty to Canada outside Quebec. His father was clear in that he wanted Quebec to stay in Canada, not because he loved Canada but because Quebec was better off within Canada. And JustinTrudeau himself has previously remarked that he finds those "non Quebec' social beliefs evidenced by Harper so repugnant that he would be in favour of Quebec separating from Canada if it continues. He brought that up again in this interview, talking about how Alberta's social views were so horrible and backward compared to glorious Quebec. But you just know he could have said the same about just about anywhere else in Canada outside Toronto and Vancouver, as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 klein was an idiot, huge cash giveaway's, cronyism, he nearly destroyed the healthcare system(it still hasn't recovered)...alberta survives despite incompetent mangement, it's the natural oil wealth that keeps us afloat...a dozen drunken monkeys l could have done as well running the provinces finances(or one drunken idiot)... compare alberta's pension/heritage funds to norways,... similar population, similar quality of life/standard of living/education, both oil and gas rich but alberta easily leads in other resources, Norway has its' own military to support ....alberta -$15.9 billion but norway has put aside a staggering $550 billion... alberta has been led by financial idiots and Klein was just one of many.. I'll compare the ability to get rich in Alberta vs. Norway. If you work hard and make good decisions, your ability to succeed in Alberta is greater than in Norway period end of sentence. Klein slayed the debt and balanced the books. I'll take drunken Klein any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Money talks. Heck the boys in Saskatchewan took a page out of his book and that place is booming. Brad wall can decide how long he wants to be premier. If I were him I'd start learning French. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 I think the think most damaging to Justin Trudeau's leadership hopes are the horrible porn-stache he's wearing in that video. Ugh. As for the comments themselves... I don't think Trudeau's excuse that he was using "Alberta" as shorthand for "Stephen Harper" really makes sense when the whole point he was making was that the greatest Prime Ministers come from a specific province. His explanation just doesn't make sense in the context in which he made his original statement. At their core, the comments reveal an "Us-and-them" mentality. "The country belongs to Us" --Quebecers. Not Them. WE have a true sense of this country; THEY don't understand it. Here's a Quebec backbencher speaking in French to a French interviewer on a station nobody watches. Like a multi-millionaire politician talking to other multi-millionaires at a private dinner, I think it's a more candid look at what he really thinks than anything he says on the campaign trail. I think Trudeau's claims right now are about as sincere as Mitt Romney claiming he wanted to be president for "the 100%" after the 47% video. Trudeau walking around Calgary in a cowboy hat is about as believable as Paul Ryan showing up at a soup kitchen to wash clean dishes for a photo-op. I also think there's another aspect to his apology that should be mentioned, is that even in the midst of apologizing he was in denial, claiming this is only being talked about because the Conservatives are scared of losing the Calgary byelection. Justin's comments aren't much different from his dad's views, or from the stuff that got the Liberal energy critic canned last week. Or from Jean Chretien saying he liked to do politics with easterners, not Albertans, because they're a "different type". Or Paul Martin on stage at a campaign rally with Buzz Hargrove when Hargrove said: "His sense is about Alberta. The wealth of Alberta everybody recognizes is much greater than it is anywhere in Canada. Those principles that he is brought up with and believes in coming out of there don't sit well with the rest of Canada." or this: -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 There were more than a couple of people that showed up in Edmonton. Perhaps more to the point is that this is a leadership race for the Liberal Party of Canada. This is not a general election where anything meaningful is taking place, This is just the media hype promoting partisan political participation in the democratic process. As Mr. Harder says this is nothing but politics. I am an Albertan, and I support Justin in his quest for leadership. I want to see what he can do. I have seen what Harper has done. The future is unknown but I prefer to think that the country could do worse than having Steve and Justin duke it out over the months to come before the next election. This is the fight the nation needs to be front and centre. The diverging ideologies between the left and the right create a political hole in the middle. That middle ground is where Justin's father sought to create the "Just Society". Oddly enough those concepts are becoming more relevant the older they become. That probably indicates the truth in the principles as conceived by its author. The idea of a nation moving forward in a manner such as.... " No one in the society should be entitled to superfluous or luxury goods until the essentials of life are made available to everyone. At first glance, that distribution would appear to [exist] in Canada. Thanks to our abundant natural wealth and to the techniques of the industrial era, it no longer seems necessary to trample on one another in the scramble for riches. Consequently, most people take it for granted that every Canadian is assured a reasonable standard of living. Unfortunately, that is not the case. The Just Society will be one in which all of our people will have the means and the motivation to participate. The Just Society will be one in which personal and political freedom will be more securely ensured than it has ever been in the past. The Just Society will be one in which the rights of minorities will be safe from the whims of intolerant majorities. The Just Society will one in which those regions and groups which have not fully shared in the country’s affluence will be given a better opportunity. The Just Society will be one where such urban problems as housing and pollution will be attacked through the application of new knowledge and new techniques. The Just Society will be one in which our Indian and Inuit population will be encouraged to assume the full rights of citizenship through policies which will give them both greater responsibility for their own future and more meaningful equality of opportunity. The Just Society will be a united Canada, united because all of its citizens will be actively involved in the development of a country where equality of opportunity is ensured and individuals are permitted to fulfill themselves in the fashion they judge best……On the never-ending road to perfect justice we will, in other words, succeed in creating the most humane and compassionate society. Pierre Elliott Trudeau, as cited in The Essential Trudeau, ed. Ron Graham. (pp.16 – 20)." It seems to me that the people of Canada want to move forward. What is needed is the political vision of a road map to prosperity. We as a people have yet to define to ourselves what that really means. The Just Society concept is worth looking into at least once, especially for the citizens of this nation. I believe Justin Trudeau was a high school drama teacher before he became an MP.If you take the last name out of the equation,what exactly has he done so far that makes you believe he deserves to be our Prime MInister?Listening to him,I think he hasn't anywhere near the intellect of his vastly over rated father. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 of coarse alberta is much wealthier in resources and doesn't have military to support... Norway didn't begin it's pension fund until 1996 so in 16 yrs Norway's built up a fund of 550 billion alberta began it's heritage fund in 1976.... alberta's contribution to equalization fund comes no where near the amount of norway's pension fund total...if alberta averaged 3.5 billion a year in equalization payments since 1996 it still only amounts to 56 billion, what was that Norway pension fund? oh yeah $550 billion in 16 years.....there's no getting around it Alberta's record of financial management sucks... And how would you compare Alberta's financial management to the home province of Justin Trudeau,perennial basket case Quebec? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 Argus, why are we just hearing about what Justin said NOW? Because there's a byelction going on in Alberta and Justin is good reviews. I heard on the news, that its a close race for the Tories and the Libs, so one has to conclude that is all about the byelection and we heard about this again until/IF justin gets the leadership ,and the next election in 2015. Now, if you don't like Justin that's find and there people out there that don't like Harper for what he's done as PM, which is alot more than any opposition MP has done or said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted November 24, 2012 Report Share Posted November 24, 2012 http://fullcomment.n...were-voted-out/ Who was it said some years back that 'a gaffe is when a politician accidentally tells the truth?' 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.