On Guard for Thee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 By "gut" healthcare, you mean continuing to expand on the largest increases the program has ever had? No I mean take 36 billion away from transfer payments as the 6% annual increase mandated by Paul Martin is reduced to 3%. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 Yes, you've tried to pedal that false hood more than once. Sorry if you didnt get it the first time. Quote
Bryan Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 Not one dime is being taken away. More is being added. All of the previous increases remain, plus an additional 3% per year. Quote
Bryan Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 Sorry if you didnt get it the first time. We get it that you're peddling something that is not true. You should stop doing that. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 We get it that you're peddling something that is not true. You should stop doing that. Maybe you should learn some basic math. 3% is less than 6%, I dont see why that is so hard to understand. Quote
Bryan Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 It's 3% in addition to the previous 6%. The provinces will get progressively MORE money each year. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 It's 3% in addition to the previous 6%. The provinces will get progressively MORE money each year. Oh no its not. Better do some research. Quote
Bryan Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 Better do some research. Yes, you should. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 Yes, you should. Not on that subject. If you think the 6% annual increase put in place by Paul Martin is not being reduced than you obviously havent really studied the issue. Quote
Keepitsimple Posted April 7, 2015 Author Report Posted April 7, 2015 So you think that the increasing drop in support for C 51 is just to do with the left do you. So the I guess one would have to assume from that logic that pollsters only poll people on the left. Dont think so. How about posting that "latest poll" that shows Harper losing ground to Trudeau? As for C51, what did you expect when pollsters start drilling down? It's like Nimbyism.....everyone wants something to be done - as long as it doesn't affect them. Try Climate Change - the greatest threat to mankind - but don't raise gasoline prices or build windmills near me. But make no mistake - Canadians want something done - that's why the President (Lorne Bozinoff) of that poll that you keep posting summarizes by saying...... support for action has decreased only very slightly. Now.....how about a cite for that poll...... Quote Back to Basics
Smallc Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 Sorry if you didnt get it the first time. There's nothing to get. You're either intentionally or unintentionally wrong. It isn't my fault. Quote
jacee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) ... everyone wants something to be done - as long as it doesn't affect them - Canadians want something done -Classic conservative thinking ... 'SOMETHING has to be done!'so let's use the biggest hammer possible and smash civil rights to pieces ... criminalize all protest ... there! That works!! Oh wait! How does that stop a radicalized lone wolf gunman? It doesn't!! But we did 'SOMETHING'!! A certain lack of intelligent thought goes into such knee-jerk policies ... OR ... is it possible? ... IS the real purpose the removal of our right to protest? . Edited April 7, 2015 by jacee Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 There's nothing to get. You're either intentionally or unintentionally wrong. It isn't my fault. The numbers do not lie. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 How about posting that "latest poll" that shows Harper losing ground to Trudeau? As for C51, what did you expect when pollsters start drilling down? It's like Nimbyism.....everyone wants something to be done - as long as it doesn't affect them. Try Climate Change - the greatest threat to mankind - but don't raise gasoline prices or build windmills near me. But make no mistake - Canadians want something done - that's why the President (Lorne Bozinoff) of that poll that you keep posting summarizes by saying...... support for action has decreased only very slightly. Now.....how about a cite for that poll...... Its not the pollsters drilling down but rather the pollsters reporting the changes in the countrys opinion of the bill after they have had a chance to drill down. Nothing to do with nimbyism, unless the by you refer to is federal legislation. It would be silly to think Canadians arent wanting to be safe, they are realizing that this aint the bill to achieve that. Something about the worst approval rating of all leaders http://www.ekospolitics.com/index.php/2015/04/if-canada-is-so-down-why-is-stephen-harper-so-up/ Quote
Smallc Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 The numbers do not lie. So it's intentional. Quote
cybercoma Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 Sorry Pal - the "fear" is all on you. If there is anything that is driving Canadians - it's not fear, it's anger and disgust at atrocities that could very well make it into Canada......so bring it on - and we'll make sure we're ready to take the reasonable steps that are required to deal with it.Atrocities that are already illegal here. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) So it's intentional. Not sure what you mean, but Im getting the impression math isnt your strong suit. Or are you like Bryan and laboring under the false assumption that the former 6% per annum increase is not ending. Edited April 7, 2015 by On Guard for Thee Quote
Bryan Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 So it's intentional. It is. OGFT has been told and shown why and how his interpretation of the funding is not correct, yet he continues to make the same false allegations. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 It is. OGFT has been told and shown why and how his interpretation of the funding is not correct, yet he continues to make the same false allegations. This from the guy who tried to say the 6% increase will remain in effect. Quote
Big Guy Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 So we have the naïve, Chamberlain peacenicks who really do not understand the dangers coming to Canada. Then we have the Chicken Little's telling us the sky is falling and we have to do something quickly no matter the cost. This has always been the case. There are those who believe the government line and those who analyse and think for themselves. I still remember that battle against those nasty North Vietnamese. If we don't stop them then the "domino principle" will apply and soon North Americans will be taken over. We got our knuckles wrapped, they won and I still do not speak Vietnamese. In Afghanistan we had to get in there quickly to stop them taking over the world. Remember - "Fight them there now of fight them here later". Guess what. We fought them there, got our knuckles wrapped and now they are slowing taking back their country. In Iraq we had a world despot who had Weapons of Mass Destruction and would use them at will to take over North America. We had to make a "pre-emptive attack" to neutralize those weapons. That battle is still going on, the MVD was a hoax and the quagmire continues. But now we hear that the ISIL threat has to be stopped there before it gets here. We have to fight them there or we have to fight them here. Stand behind your troops or stand in front of them. Blah, blah and blah. People are considered naïve if they show "lack of wisdom or judgement". I suggest that those who believe that the sky is falling (again) and that we have to fight them there or we will have to fight them here (again) are those who are naïve. How many times do you have to look at something before you see it? Remember - We have to bomb the hell out of them over there or we will all be wearing turbans soon! :rolleyes: Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Argus Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 I think the drop in support for the bill has to do with people realizing they dont have to give away freedom as a trade for protection. Once again, as people take a closer look at the actual bill it becomes less acceptable. Really? Well, now that you've taken a closer look perhaps you can address that question long ago posed to opponents of the bill: what freedoms are you giving up? 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
Argus Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 There's plenty of anger and disgust at the atrocities Canada and it's allies have done as well. Not noticeably. 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
Argus Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 But yet you support the greatest terrorists on the planet, Would Omar El Hussein be one of those? 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
Argus Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 International Terrorism: Image and Reality Noam Chomsky In Alexander George (ed.), Western State Terrorism, Routledge, December, 1991 If you respect Chomsky perhaps you ought to have a look at what he's had to say about 9/11 truthers. 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
Argus Posted April 7, 2015 Report Posted April 7, 2015 Not on that subject. If you think the 6% annual increase put in place by Paul Martin is not being reduced than you obviously havent really studied the issue. A reduction in increases still isn't a decrease. Do you honestly think they could keep increasing transfer payments at three times the rate of inflation indefinitely? 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
.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.