Argus Posted October 9, 2015 Report Posted October 9, 2015 I love how, when it serves their purposes, the Tories proclaim themselves responsible for the post-2008 stimulus spending, but then can turn around in a heartbeat and blame the Opposition. I'm not the Tories. "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
ToadBrother Posted October 9, 2015 Report Posted October 9, 2015 I'm not the Tories. My mistake. You're merely an ardent admirer.
Argus Posted October 9, 2015 Report Posted October 9, 2015 My mistake. You're merely an ardent admirer. You make a lot of mistakes. I've criticized them on numerous occasions, and have specifically and repeatedly said I am not an admirer of Harper or his style of government. That does not cause me to suspend my judgement on the shallow little boy the Liberals are running for office. "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
poochy Posted October 9, 2015 Report Posted October 9, 2015 You make a lot of mistakes. I've criticized them on numerous occasions, and have specifically and repeatedly said I am not an admirer of Harper or his style of government. That does not cause me to suspend my judgement on the shallow little boy the Liberals are running for office. Im no fan of Harper either, he is the best we have right now, in the only party that seems to exist in this reality, On the flip side of the coin, i don't want to elect Trudea or Mulcair, but i don't hate them, i think the country is stronger than whatever they might do, just as I do with Harper, compare that to the juvenile ranting of the left, that's where the biggest differences lie between the supporters of various parties imo. Even though I follow politics as much as most, I will not go half as crazy if Trudeau wins as his supporters have from day one done with Harper, and in my opinion that speaks very poorly or those people's ability to think like a rational adult.
Icebound Posted October 10, 2015 Report Posted October 10, 2015 No, it's not your right. If you can't afford kids, then don't come begging me for help. I don't care what happens to them. There are no heart strings that you can pull from me to support your children. If it came down to it. You have 0 rights to a child if you can't afford it. A VERY short-sighted view. Wealth comes from labour, and labour is done by people. If you want this country to produce wealth, it has to have the people to create it, and today's children become tomorrow's citizens and wealth-creators. I MIGHT tend to agree that there is no "right" to children, but it is short-sighted not to support their conception and upbringing, including adoption and IVF. True, since it is a public expense, it is reasonable to adopt limits to access of non-natural procedures. However, it is perfectly reasonable to provide some public support .... YOUR support.... because children are an absolutely necessary resource for the country to flourish in the future. ...
angrypenguin Posted October 10, 2015 Report Posted October 10, 2015 A VERY short-sighted view. ... I'm certainly not a supporter of IVF. Did you know IVF only has a 30% or so chance of success? I'd much rather spend that money for people who are already alive who need access to expensive drugs, as an example. I'd rather care for the living. As far as your comments about this country's long term success....1) world population is ever increasing 2) Immigration 3) We live in a global economy. Focusing on just Canada - now that's short cited. My views are my own and not those of my employer.
Icebound Posted October 10, 2015 Report Posted October 10, 2015 As far as your comments about this country's long term success....1) world population is ever increasing 2) Immigration 3) We live in a global economy. Focusing on just Canada - now that's short cited. Ah, now we are getting somewhere. Global economics trumps national interest. That will, eventually, mean global government.... at the very least, a global Federation. Free cross-border movement of all peoples? Giving up sovereignty? More power to the large multi-national corporations? That's an interesting view of the future. I wonder which political parties in Canada and the USA might be supportive of that? ... ...
angrypenguin Posted October 10, 2015 Report Posted October 10, 2015 Ah, now we are getting somewhere. Global economics trumps national interest. That will, eventually, mean global government.... at the very least, a global Federation. Free cross-border movement of all peoples? Giving up sovereignty? More power to the large multi-national corporations? That's an interesting view of the future. I wonder which political parties in Canada and the USA might be supportive of that? ... Wayyy wayyy past our time! If there is ever a baby shortage in Canada, I think it would warrant some discussion, but as of now, we don't have a baby crisis so I'd rather spend money improving the quality of life for those in our country. ... My views are my own and not those of my employer.
Argus Posted October 10, 2015 Report Posted October 10, 2015 However, it is perfectly reasonable to provide some public support .... YOUR support.... because children are an absolutely necessary resource for the country to flourish in the future. I don't disagree. However, the issue I have is that middle class families don't have any problem supporting the raising of children. The problem they have is with the raising of children while maintaining a lifestyle they want, though don't need. They want children, but also want a big house and two cars and vacations down south. Everyone in the family needs a cell phone and a laptop, and they need top line cable and internet, of course. None of my neighbours makes as much money as I do, but they all have big houses that cost more than mine. My parents raised three kids in a rented townhouse and it never felt very cramped. There are townhouses nearby that are half the cost of the big, detached houses on my street, but people live here and complain about the cost. "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
angrypenguin Posted October 10, 2015 Report Posted October 10, 2015 I don't disagree. However, the issue I have is that middle class families don't have any problem supporting the raising of children. The problem they have is with the raising of children while maintaining a lifestyle they want, though don't need. They want children, but also want a big house and two cars and vacations down south. Everyone in the family needs a cell phone and a laptop, and they need top line cable and internet, of course. None of my neighbours makes as much money as I do, but they all have big houses that cost more than mine. My parents raised three kids in a rented townhouse and it never felt very cramped. There are townhouses nearby that are half the cost of the big, detached houses on my street, but people live here and complain about the cost. To sum this up in one word: entitlement. My views are my own and not those of my employer.
waldo Posted October 10, 2015 Report Posted October 10, 2015 thread wildly off-topic... what... no more gaffes?
dialamah Posted October 10, 2015 Report Posted October 10, 2015 I don't disagree. However, the issue I have is that middle class families don't have any problem supporting the raising of children. The problem they have is with the raising of children while maintaining a lifestyle they want, though don't need. They want children, but also want a big house and two cars and vacations down south. Everyone in the family needs a cell phone and a laptop, and they need top line cable and internet, of course. None of my neighbours makes as much money as I do, but they all have big houses that cost more than mine. My parents raised three kids in a rented townhouse and it never felt very cramped. There are townhouses nearby that are half the cost of the big, detached houses on my street, but people live here and complain about the cost. Gosh, Argus -- I read this and even agree, to a point. I hear all the time about how 'unaffordable' housing is in Vancouver - but they all refer to single-family dwellings in Vancouver or condos right downtown. I don't make a huge amount of money, barely *middle class* according to JT - but I was willing to 'sacrifice' location so I have a nice townhouse with a small yard of it's own, a huge common yard and park nearby. Sure, a detached house would be nice - and a large yard for my puppies - but I'm so much better off than many, many people - I can't complain. I think if the media highlighted what can be done, instead of what can't be done, people might start thinking out of the box a little bit. I've a friend who refuses to buy anything, unless it's a detached house - so she lives in rentals, not realizing she'd have been better off in an inexpensive townhouse or condo, that would have appreciated, and she might have been able to upgrade to what she really wants by now. However, I will never agree that people aren't entitled to have children, if they want.
Recommended Posts