WestCanMan Posted October 15, 2015 Report Posted October 15, 2015 I can't see why it was even considered in bad form. Churchill did all sorts of paid speaking engagements in 1930s when he was in his Wilderness Years, and indeed did a speaking tour of the United States. He was an MP the whole time.making money from a foreign country is different from making money from a charity at home, where you are already on the public payroll. Quote If CNN gave an infinite number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters, leftists would believe everything they typed. If you missed something on the Cultist Narrative Network, don't worry, the dolt horde here will make sure everyone hears it. "If it didn't come from CNN, it's heresy!" - leftist "intellectuals"
socialist Posted October 15, 2015 Report Posted October 15, 2015 making money from a foreign country is different from making money from a charity at home, where you are already on the public payroll. Quote Thankful to have become a free thinker.
waldo Posted October 15, 2015 Report Posted October 15, 2015 LOL. Your little line plot explains nothing. I guess you are trying to appeal to your typical low info voter. you asked for information on the proposed Liberal Canada Child Benefit... that extract page and the linked Liberal Party of Canada platform document speak to costing. And no, I'm not trying to appeal to you - just responding to your request. Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 16, 2015 Report Posted October 16, 2015 For me it was Harper and his constant campaigning. Every critic had to be maligned, every bill had to be given a silly, misleading name. Maybe that is just the modern political system but I felt he was ramming his message home 24/7. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted October 16, 2015 Report Posted October 16, 2015 For me it was Harper and his constant campaigning. Every critic had to be maligned, every bill had to be given a silly, misleading name. Maybe that is just the modern political system but I felt he was ramming his message home 24/7. Yup. All partisan. All the time. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 16, 2015 Report Posted October 16, 2015 (edited) Well, not while extolling his virtue and praising him. Trudeau, as far as I know, has never even suggested that a single, solitary thing his father did was in error. Here's an example on an important topic: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-justin-trudeau-interview-1.3219479 Edited October 16, 2015 by SpankyMcFarland Quote
Argus Posted October 16, 2015 Report Posted October 16, 2015 For me it was Harper and his constant campaigning. Every critic had to be maligned, every bill had to be given a silly, misleading name. Maybe that is just the modern political system but I felt he was ramming his message home 24/7. Sure he was and is annoying. But that's fluff, style as opposed to substance. 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
poochy Posted October 16, 2015 Report Posted October 16, 2015 For me it was Harper and his constant campaigning. Every critic had to be maligned, every bill had to be given a silly, misleading name. Maybe that is just the modern political system but I felt he was ramming his message home 24/7. Wow, talk about sensitive. Quote
ToadBrother Posted October 16, 2015 Report Posted October 16, 2015 Wow, talk about sensitive. And the Tories' aren't sensitive? Any criticism of Harper leads to some pretty hyperbolic pro-Tory anti-Opposition bashing, even as it appears most Tories don't even like the man. Quote
Argus Posted October 16, 2015 Report Posted October 16, 2015 And the Tories' aren't sensitive? Any criticism of Harper leads to some pretty hyperbolic pro-Tory anti-Opposition bashing, even as it appears most Tories don't even like the man. No, it depends on whether the criticism is fair. I won't defend him from criticism I think is legit. Note my absence from certain topics. What I usually point out is that the criticism is partisan, and that what he has done (in most cases) is what their own party does and has done, and what all parties do. Criticizing him for running deficits, for example, is inane. And I will point that out. Criticizing him for not coming through on his open government pledge, on the other hand, well, you won't find me siding with him on that one, or on defense. 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
poochy Posted October 16, 2015 Report Posted October 16, 2015 And the Tories' aren't sensitive? Any criticism of Harper leads to some pretty hyperbolic pro-Tory anti-Opposition bashing, even as it appears most Tories don't even like the man. You missed the point, not surprising. Maybe the moderator can delete this again, for no reason, maybe your misunderstanding needs defending, im not sure. Quote
69cat Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 If the CPC has been so bad as people say, why is it that previous governments have not done all these things mentioned? http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/lawrence-solomon-on-harper-you-be-the-judge And really bringing up proroguing parliament when Chretein did it four times in his term is not a great way to attack the CPC. Legalize pot, great, way to break it down into dollars. What do you think the workplace will do, that place were people can get killed if they f-up, when someone can stop at the corner store and grab a pack of pot "to take the edge off" and show up at work. Oh yeah, just watch for 'glazed over eyes' (whatever that means) and report him before he hurts himself or you. More impaired drivers on the road is a good thing too. As long as we tax them it is all good. Deficit spending because times are good, because interest rates are low, because times are bad. So exactly when does this financial wizard think is a good time to pay down debt? When times are so-so we figure and so never? Quote
Smallc Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 And really bringing up proroguing parliament when Chretein did it four times in his term is not a great way to attack the CPC. Prorogation is a normal parliamentary procedure. The debate is over when it should be used. Legalize pot, great, way to break it down into dollars. What do you think the workplace will do, that place were people can get killed if they f-up, when someone can stop at the corner store and grab a pack of pot "to take the edge off" and show up at work. If you don't think they can do that now, you're very naive. Oh yeah, just watch for 'glazed over eyes' (whatever that means) and report him before he hurts himself or you. More impaired drivers on the road is a good thing too. As long as we tax them it is all good. Care to show any statistics showing a correlation between legalization and increased use? Deficit spending because times are good, because interest rates are low, because times are bad. So exactly when does this financial wizard think is a good time to pay down debt? When times are so-so we figure and so never? Apparently, he thinks it's 3 years from now, since that's when he plans to balance the budget. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 (edited) If the CPC has been so bad as people say, why is it that previous governments have not done all these things mentioned? http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/lawrence-solomon-on-harper-you-be-the-judge And really bringing up proroguing parliament when Chretein did it four times in his term is not a great way to attack the CPC. Legalize pot, great, way to break it down into dollars. What do you think the workplace will do, that place were people can get killed if they f-up, when someone can stop at the corner store and grab a pack of pot "to take the edge off" and show up at work. Oh yeah, just watch for 'glazed over eyes' (whatever that means) and report him before he hurts himself or you. More impaired drivers on the road is a good thing too. As long as we tax them it is all good. Deficit spending because times are good, because interest rates are low, because times are bad. So exactly when does this financial wizard think is a good time to pay down debt? When times are so-so we figure and so never? Do you have a more reliable source than Lawrence Solomon? I don't know about what's in this article but a lot of his stuff is straight from Wingnutzville. Here's an example of an an anti-vaxxer editorial. A few years ago, someone sent me something he wrote that was complete conspiracy theory. He found Bing was returning different results from Google and concluded that was "proof" that Google was hiding something. Edited October 17, 2015 by ReeferMadness Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
69cat Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Yeah, prorogue of parliament is pretty common as the Liberals demonstrate except when the CPC does it an then it is undemocratic and requires public outrage. So, the thinking is that legalized pot will make it harder to obtain? Care to explain. My thinking is a substance that is easier to obtain is more likely to show up where it shouldn't, i think it is naieve to think otherwise. I mean it is possible that making pot readily available will make it less prolific but you will have to show me stats on that. Maybe the Libs will seriuosly limit the amount of pot available, though the black market will fill the void, and maybe they will bring in zero tolerance (which i think would work well) but i have not seen a policy on this. If there is something out there then send me a link as i would like to learn. As for deficits, yeah, lets put it off till tomorrow and then tomorrow comes and things arent so good. So, what are we at three years from now - $25B intead of being around +$15B, so a $40B difference. And if interest rates go up 0.5% the payments double. Well maybe not as the gov probably has a preferred rate structure but not unreasonable to expect rates to climb 0.5 to 2% in a few years. May be time to quit hitting the credit card like Ontario likes to do. Quote
69cat Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 No reefer, i dont have a way to back it up but there are a lot of good things mentioned. The requirement for the first nations bands to have open books is a big step i think, much like unions required to do so. The bands were going through a court case fighting this law a few weeks ago in Saskatoon but havent heard what developed. I dont see how band members are served by hidden finances. I dont follow things like greatly raising environmental fines and anti corruption laws so thinking someone here can say if it is false. From what i know of some of the items noted they sound correct to me however. Just curious as mainstream media paints a different picture. Quote
dialamah Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 So, the thinking is that legalized pot will make it harder to obtain? Care to explain. My thinking is a substance that is easier to obtain is more likely to show up where it shouldn't, i think it is naieve to think otherwise. I mean it is possible that making pot readily available will make it less prolific but you will have to show me stats on that.It's pretty easy to get pot right now, regardless of what age you are. If legalizing it takes it out of the hands of criminal elemnents, than it will be harder for kids to get it. No solution is perfect; just as there are adults who will bootleg alcohol or cigarettes to underage kids, or let their kids drink at home, so it would likely be the same for pot. Taking the criminal element out of makes a lot of sense to me. Taxing it also makes a lot of sense to me. Why should criminals make all the money? As for deficits, yeah, lets put it off till tomorrow and then tomorrow comes and things arent so good. So, what are we at three years from now - $25B intead of being around +$15B, so a $40B difference. And if interest rates go up 0.5% the payments double.Did you ask these questions of the Conservatives in 2011, after they'd run three years of deficits? Quote
Smallc Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 So, the thinking is that legalized pot will make it harder to obtain? Care to explain. A kid can't just go buy alcohol. He needs to find a middle man willing to sell it to him. A kid can go right to the source for pot, generally no questions asked. Quote
69cat Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 The other way to look at it smallc is that i stopped and grabbed a 12 pk to watch the football game with friends. If i couldnt get beer by simply walking into a store then i would go without, i wouldnt make my own starting with barley, i wouldnt run a stihl and i wouldnt go to some hidden place to buy illegally. And there would be a whole lot of beer/wine/hard liquor drinkers also going without. The die hards would find away. With the people i know, pot will be bought a lot more because it will be easier to get. There are a lot of die hards that buy at will but there are lots more potential users who dont go through the trouble right now. Perhaps the Liberal pot plan could work or it could be the worst venture into legalized drugs the world has yet to see. Some sort of proposal would be nice to see but i guess we are all along for the ride on this one. There are a lot of ways to screw it up though. Pretty sure OH&S is not going to like it though. As for the deficits, it is not really fair to judge without a time machine but given that the 2008 and 2011 elections resulted more or less because the CPC (with support of bloc) opposed demands of the libs and ndp for greater deficit spending, i would suggest that the proposed Liberal deficit will quickly get tossed aside if things get tight. Quote
Smallc Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 The other way to look at it smallc is that i stopped and grabbed a 12 pk to watch the football game with friends. If i couldnt get beer by simply walking into a store then i would go without, i wouldnt make my own starting with barley, i wouldnt run a stihl and i wouldnt go to some hidden place to buy illegally. You've never bought weed, I take it. Quote
69cat Posted October 17, 2015 Report Posted October 17, 2015 Never had to worry much, had enough of it around. But there is not much difference between people who will buy pot and those who buy alchohol. And speaking to your point of it easy to get i doubt the illegal pot will decrease much. Either the gov pot will be limited in availability, low in thc, or taxed so it is expensive. So the supply that exists now will probably remain so the new buyers will be the guys that would not normally have bought. But i guess you can hope that the network will just disappear. Maybe the law will get tough on illegal pot. If they havent done it yet then not likely to do so therefore business as usual. Just more available through the gov. Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 Mr. Perrin joins the ranks: http://www.yorkregion.com/news-story/5966061-tories-lost-moral-authority-to-govern-ex-pmo-lawyer/ Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 And another defection: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/former-conservative-mp-dona-cadman-backs-federal-liberals-1.3276680 Something is going on here. Quote
ToadBrother Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 And another defection: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/former-conservative-mp-dona-cadman-backs-federal-liberals-1.3276680 Something is going on here. That brings back memories of Harper's first significant scandal, and the first hint we had of the amorality that a Harper government would employ. Quote
-TSS- Posted October 18, 2015 Report Posted October 18, 2015 I think the alternative to Harper is even worse so better stick with him but it is your choice in Canada. 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.