PIK Posted September 6, 2014 Report Posted September 6, 2014 Mulroney should maybe stick to ripping off german arms dealers. His time has come and gone. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Argus Posted September 6, 2014 Report Posted September 6, 2014 Mulroney should maybe stick to ripping off german arms dealers. His time has come and gone. He ripped off the Canadian people even more. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Hal 9000 Posted September 6, 2014 Report Posted September 6, 2014 Harper is one of the few western leaders (maybe the only one) who didn't panic during the comic meltdown - and we're a better country because of it. That's all I care about - everything else is "wedge" issues and petty complaints. Quote The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball
overthere Posted September 6, 2014 Report Posted September 6, 2014 He and Chretien before him ignored health care because they don't want to deal with the complications and fallout. Ah no. Harper funded federal funding increases in that exceeded inflation, for years. And still they whine. I think Jesus was a Socialist. He's a guy who follows through on campaign promises though, big time. He'c turn moose turds into a plate of poutine on every table, a straw into a completely safe pipeline. Just that kind of guy..and he'd still only have gotten maybe four seats total for the PCs in 1993. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Argus Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 Ah no. Harper funded federal funding increases in that exceeded inflation, for years. And still they whine. The health care system costs in this country are rising at an unsustainable rate. There are inherent systemic inefficiencies which need to be addressed, including what to do with all the aging boomers. Right now they're being stuffed to the rafters in hospitals, filling all the beds at enormous cost. It would sure be nice if we had a federal government with vision which would call all parties together and address this, don't you think? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jacee Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 Ah no. Harper funded federal funding increases in that exceeded inflation, for years. And still they whine. That only funds the status quo. No funds for progress, new developments, technology, and increasing use by an aging population. That's less funding per person, with less advanced care. . Quote
overthere Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 What a pack of whiners. Here is reality, kids. Take note: resources are limited . They always have been and always will be, even the Liberals could not tax their way through that little dilemma.We all live longer, much longer than previous generations. Despite all this technology keeping us alive, we are all going to die and Harper cannot change that no matter what strategy is employed. Neither can Trudeau or Mulcair. If we spend 40% of all the money on health care, it is not enough for you. What would be enough? 50%? 80%? 100%.? Give us a number that you think is adequate. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
jbg Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 What a pack of whiners. Here is reality, kids. Take note: resources are limited . They always have been and always will be, even the Liberals could not tax their way through that little dilemma.We all live longer, much longer than previous generations. Despite all this technology keeping us alive, we are all going to die and Harper cannot change that no matter what strategy is employed. Neither can Trudeau or Mulcair. If we spend 40% of all the money on health care, it is not enough for you. What would be enough? 50%? 80%? 100%.? Give us a number that you think is adequate. Excellent set of points. I couldn't have expressed it better (especially at 2:58 a.m. NYC time). Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Bob Macadoo Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 What a pack of whiners. Here is reality, kids. Take note: resources are limited . They always have been and always will be, even the Liberals could not tax their way through that little dilemma.We all live longer, much longer than previous generations. Despite all this technology keeping us alive, we are all going to die and Harper cannot change that no matter what strategy is employed. Neither can Trudeau or Mulcair. If we spend 40% of all the money on health care, it is not enough for you. What would be enough? 50%? 80%? 100%.? Give us a number that you think is adequate. What is business model for R&D? That amount over status quo (inflation, age demographic). You know actual economic based funding. Quote
Argus Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 What a pack of whiners. Here is reality, kids. Take note: resources are limited . They always have been and always will be, even the Liberals could not tax their way through that little dilemma.We all live longer, much longer than previous generations. Despite all this technology keeping us alive, we are all going to die and Harper cannot change that no matter what strategy is employed. Neither can Trudeau or Mulcair. If we spend 40% of all the money on health care, it is not enough for you. What would be enough? 50%? 80%? 100%.? Give us a number that you think is adequate. What a ridiculous statement. Have you read anything on the subject at all? Ever? Have you read anything anyone has said? Right now our health care system is grossly inefficient in many respects. It's also confused and spread among too many governments. It needs a central government to show some leadership and look to make changes. We spend far too much for what we get compared to the Europeans, and all we're doing is continuing to increase spending every year without any idea how to reform and improve the system. But making changes to health care is a big, complex issue, and the Harper government doesn't like things which don't fit into quick sound bites for publicity purposes. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Moonbox Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 It wasn't THAT unpopular. Most people did understand it was a replacement for a hidden tax. I certainly did. No, it was the atmosphere of constant corruption and scandal which plagued Mulroney, along with, outside of Quebec, him being seen as sucking up to Quebec too much. Not that that helped since Quebec left them high and dry when they jumped to the BQ. I don't think it was really either. The PC torpedoed because they horribly botched the Constitutional debates (frustrating pretty much everyone) and ran enormous deficits throughout. The fact that most of the deficit spending was debt-service payments on Trudeau's debt went over most Canadians' heads. It's always about the economy and Mulroney failed spectacularly in that regard. The Reform Party was born mostly out of protest for irresponsible PC fiscal policy and the Liberals were elected in the 90's with a mandate to balance the budget. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
overthere Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 What a ridiculous statement. Have you read anything on the subject at all? Ever? Have you read anything anyone has said? Right now our health care system is grossly inefficient in many respects. It's also confused and spread among too many governments. It needs a central government to show some leadership and look to make changes. We spend far too much for what we get compared to the Europeans, and all we're doing is continuing to increase spending every year without any idea how to reform and improve the system. But making changes to health care is a big, complex issue, and the Harper government doesn't like things which don't fit into quick sound bites for publicity purposes. I don't see a single number there, having trouble with that are we? My province spends about 40% of its budget on health care now. Over 90 % of that comes from the province, the balance from the feds. The Europeans blah blah blah- the majority of Yurp has a larger social contract than us and is in overall worst shape financially and the same shape with health outcomes: quality of life and life expectancy . France( a tottering giant economically) has fat health care user fees plus huge centrally managed expenditures for health care , is that what you want? Harper has enforced the Canada Health Act, sent the provinces more cash than ever before and comformed with the jurisdictions required in our constituion. If you want change, agitate for constitutional reform. In the meantime, clean up your own province: inefficiencies, services that are covered and not covered, drug plans, licensing of physicians, control of medical schools, hospitals, payment schemes. It's all your responsibility. And please, stop whining Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
On Guard for Thee Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 I don't see a single number there, having trouble with that are we? My province spends about 40% of its budget on health care now. Over 90 % of that comes from the province, the balance from the feds. The Europeans blah blah blah- the majority of Yurp has a larger social contract than us and is in overall worst shape financially and the same shape with health outcomes: quality of life and life expectancy . France( a tottering giant economically) has fat health care user fees plus huge centrally managed expenditures for health care , is that what you want? Harper has enforced the Canada Health Act, sent the provinces more cash than ever before and comformed with the jurisdictions required in our constituion. If you want change, agitate for constitutional reform. In the meantime, clean up your own province: inefficiencies, services that are covered and not covered, drug plans, licensing of physicians, control of medical schools, hospitals, payment schemes. It's all your responsibility. And please, stop whining Man where do you get your numbers? Harper has CUT xfer payments to the provinces for health care. My personal opinion is he is attempting to gut it and turn it into a privately funded system which will turn into the fiasco that Americans have to deal with. Quote
Argus Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 I don't see a single number there, having trouble with that are we? My province spends about 40% of its budget on health care now. Over 90 % of that comes from the province, the balance from the feds. The Europeans blah blah blah- the majority of Yurp has a larger social contract than us and is in overall worst shape financially and the same shape with health outcomes: quality of life and life expectancy . France( a tottering giant economically) has fat health care user fees plus huge centrally managed expenditures for health care , is that what you want? I want what works best. If user fees work best then yes, that's what I want. Your position, if I read it correctly, is that you have no care or interest in reforming a system which is sucking down greater and greater amounts of money despite so-so results. So when your province is spending 90% of its budget on health will you still be sneering at people and calling them names when they suggest the system needs reform? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
cybercoma Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 Like? I remember near the end of his last term how his loyalists were deseprately searching around for a 'legacy'. There was even talk of building some sort of grand avenue in Ottawa, something at least, to remind the world he'd ever been prime minister. That never came about. So after so many years of office, years when, like the Tories, they ignored all major problems, such as health care, what is it you believe they did? Harper has done stuff, just as unimportant, in large measure, as Chretien. But it's all tinkering where he doesn't think it will cause controversy or cost him votes. I've seen nothing bold out of this government after eight years, any more than I saw anything bold out of Chretien. Chretien was content as long as the polls showed him ahead, to do nothing. Harper is also fixated on the polls, and, as you say, on PR and image. Reality doesn't matter so much. I'm an eternal optimist with every new hockey season. Who knows? But I have my doubts Trudeau, from what we've seen of him thus far and who he's taking advice from, is going to be any less of a disappointment than Harper. In fact, I believe he'll be more energetic, but I believe he'll eagerly seize at ideas which, like McGuinty, are poorly thought out, and will ultimately weaken the country. We'll get higher spending, higher taxes, higher unemployment, and bigger deficits. Fair enough. I can accept this. Quote
waldo Posted September 7, 2014 Report Posted September 7, 2014 Fair enough. I can accept this. nice free pass you're giving the Argus!!! I haven't been following this thread... didn't realize his Chretien bashing and Harper ass-covering had extended into yet another thread! There's no shortage of major Chretien accomplishments... put the Canadian fiscal house in order, Canadian unity, Clarity Act, same-sex marriage, headed the Constitution patriation ala the Charter of Rights & Freedoms, refused to join the U.S./UK Iraq debacle, Canada & the Kyoto Protocol, directed Canada into a leadership and promotional role with/for the International Criminal Court, Millenium Scholarship Foundation, led the G8 to an action plan to respond to Africa's NEPAD proposal, shaped Canadian foreign policy around humane internationalism, reformed political party financing, etc., etc., etc. rather than your free pass offering, why not challenge the Argus to step-up and state what significant accomplishments his boy Harper has realized? Quote
Bryan Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 Harper has CUT xfer payments to the provinces for health care. No he hasn't. They've been increased substantially, year after year, and they continue to increase. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 No he hasn't. They've been increased substantially, year after year, and they continue to increase. Oh yes he has. The new budget takes out the "equalization" payment portion of the CHT and replacing it with the "per capita" transfer. So called have not provinces lose ~16.5 billion over the next 5 years. The only province where xfer payments increase is Alberta...surprise surprise. Quote
Smallc Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 No you're wrong. The speed if the increases have dropped, but transfer payments will still increase every year. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 No you're wrong. The speed if the increases have dropped, but transfer payments will still increase every year. No they won't. The 6% increase Canada wide that Martin used ends either next year of the year after. Then this stupid concept of tying healthcare xfer payments to provincial GDP comes in. Hopefully Harper is gone by then and we can chuck that idea. Quote
Smallc Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 I need you to show me that it's tied to provincial GDP growth. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 Page 279 of the 2014 budget. Quote
Smallc Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 That's not what it says. It eliminates tax point funding calculations and goes to a purely per capita system. It changes the growth to Canada's Nominal GDP growth or 3%, whichever is greater. It also ensures that no province will lose funding. Quote
cybercoma Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 Per capita is a terrible method, considering it doesn't account for population density. The per capita funding of downtown Toronto is a hell of a lot different than sparse rural areas. Quote
Smallc Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 Perhaps. On the other hand, per capita has always been the main past of the calculation. Quote
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.