Centrist Party of Canada

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

It just shows what some people actually think about the threat from climate change.  If they took it as seriously as they should, they would realise that cutting emissions was all that matters, and playing favourites did not.  For any reason. 

It's why we aren't going to stop climate change.

The real reason is that so many people insist on being so idiotic about socialism. They think it means everyone gets 1 bowl a pair of pyjamas and an AK47 or something. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The real reason is that so many people insist on being so idiotic about socialism. They think it means everyone gets 1 bowl a pair of pyjamas and an AK47 or something. 

Sadly, those who do show up with the AK47 will probably get their way.

That aside though, were you answering someone else?  I don't see the connection between that and the reluctance to do what it actually takes to combat AGW.

Edited April 15, 2020 by bcsapper

[WestCanMan]

If you had any doubts about my “you don’t need to answer any questions with a concise, complete and truthful response just watch the video of Chrystia Freeland Libbing in Parliament. 
I’ll find the vid link if you haven’t seen it. Just on phone. 
 

Edited April 15, 2020 by WestCanMan

[eyeball]

17 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Sadly, those who do show up with the AK47 will probably get their way.

That aside though, were you answering someone else?  I don't see the connection between that and the reluctance to do what it actually takes to combat AGW.

The connection is that casting climate action as a communist plot makes reluctance towards action easier.  I think people who buy into and spread that fear are full of disingenuous shit to be perfectly honest.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

The connection is that casting climate action as a communist plot makes reluctance towards action easier.  I think people who buy into and spread that fear are full of disingenuous shit to be perfectly honest.

Yeah, me too.  In the end it won't make any difference though.

[Army Guy]

35 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The connection is that casting climate action as a communist plot makes reluctance towards action easier.  I think people who buy into and spread that fear are full of disingenuous shit to be perfectly honest.

Climate change is not a communist plot, in fact there are many things that communist plot against, climate change is not one of them. They have an agenda, and no where is climate change on that agenda, you really think North Korea has a climate change plan, or for that matter a concern.....or do you think they are more concerned with military expansion of conventional wpns,and the development of  Nuclear wpns…  food production, ways to control the population....., Same as China they are more concerned with losing their current share of the global market than how much carbon they put into the planet... In their minds climate change is a problem for the west.

Thats not spreading fear, but fact...

[Argus]

18 hours ago, eyeball said:

The real reason is that so many people insist on being so idiotic about socialism. They think it means everyone gets 1 bowl a pair of pyjamas and an AK47 or something. 

So far that has been exactly what they get in every country where Socialists take power.

[Argus]

55 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The connection is that casting climate action as a communist plot makes reluctance towards action easier.  I think people who buy into and spread that fear are full of disingenuous shit to be perfectly honest.

Climate change is not a communist plot. What action we take, however, is heavily influenced by Socialist beliefs in equality, the hatred of western capitalism, and the desire to advocate on behalf of the third world. You said it yourself. They have to be allowed to 'catch up'. Thus they cannot be required to do anything about climate change other than accept $100 billion per year from the West (as per the Paris accord). So the West gets poorer and the third world gets richer while building coal plants.

If all they cared about was reducing carbon emissions there'd be requirements for every single country. That way we wouldn't be closing down factories because they emit too much CO2 and seeing them sprout up in Vietnam, Thailand, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Not to mention China.

[eyeball]

22 minutes ago, Argus said:

What action we take, however, is heavily influenced by Socialist beliefs in equality, the hatred of western capitalism...

I'm afraid it's as impossible to have a serious discussion with someone who throws the term hatred of western capitalism into the mix as it is with people who bring up things like the deepstate.

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I'm afraid it's as impossible to have a serious discussion with someone who throws the term hatred of western capitalism into the mix as it is with people who bring up things like the deepstate.

You speak with such clarity, it's almost like Bill Gates hasn't inserted his UN brain chip into you yet...

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I'm afraid it's as impossible to have a serious discussion with someone who throws the term hatred of western capitalism into the mix as it is with people who bring up things like the deepstate.

I always thought you hated western capitalism?

[eyeball]

25 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I always thought you hated western capitalism?

That explains why I always thought you were a dingbat.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

That explains why I always thought you were a dingbat.

No it doesn't.  You didn't know I thought that until just now. 

You must have had other reasons.

[eyeball]

 

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

No it doesn't.  You didn't know I thought that until just now. 

You must have had other reasons.

Intuition?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

 

Intuition?

It's not reliable.  It it was, I'd be rich.

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

It's not reliable.  It it was, I'd be rich.

Broken clock I guess. I get that attributed to me everyday. Sometimes twice. 

[Argus]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

I'm afraid it's as impossible to have a serious discussion with someone who throws the term hatred of western capitalism into the mix as it is with people who bring up things like the deepstate.

Dude. You've been on my ignore list for three years because it's impossible to have a serious conversation with YOU. I only look when I'm bored or when I read a response to you from someone else.

If you think there isn't a deep and abiding hatred for western capitalism among the frenzied mob of the socialist left you simply haven't been paying attention, or more likely just shrug it off since their views are so similar to yours.

[Moonlight Graham]

On 4/13/2020 at 11:42 AM, Michael Hardner said:

If there is hope, Winston wrote, it lies in the Red Tories.  Do they still exist ?  Are they willing to show themselves and ignore the frothing conservative fringe that demands

1. UN withdrawal,

2. ending refugee programs

3. and ignoring climate change ?  

1.  Conservatives would say the UN is a corrupt waste of money with power in the General Assembly dominated by 3rd world dictatorships with little respect for human rights.  Progressives would say the UN fosters peaceful resolution of conflicts & international cooperation.  There is truth in both claims.  The centrist position would be to reform or replace the UN with something similar but better.  The right would say leave/defund the UN, the left would say keep status quo or make closer ties to UN.

2. Conservatives would say many refugees bring poverty and thus crime into 1st-world nations and sap our welfare systems. Progressives would say they are fleeing for their lives and need our help.  There is truth in both claims. A centrist position would be to bring in refugees that are capable of a decent income, while helping to relocate unskilled/uneducated refugees to a safe country with incomes that match their socioeconomic potential.  The right would say reduce or block refugees, the left would say maintain or increase #'s and help them more inside our countries.

3. Conservatives would say the economy is more important than the environment. Progressives would say the environment is more important than the economy.  Both are important, so centrists would try to balance the two.

Centrist positions are usually (but not always) better than solidly rightwing or leftwing positions. The further you go toward the ideological poles the more unbalanced and incomplete (and thus wrong) positions become, because the more they fail to capture the necessary truths of the opposing side. That's why i'm usually moderate on positions, and why people on the far left and far right are so often wrong.  So wrong in fact that the only way they can keep people supporting their policies is through dictatorship.

[CentristPartyofCanada]

49 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

1.  Conservatives would say the UN is a corrupt waste of money with power in the General Assembly dominated by 3rd world dictatorships with little respect for human rights.  Progressives would say the UN fosters peaceful resolution of conflicts & international cooperation.  There is truth in both claims.  The centrist position would be to reform or replace the UN with something similar but better.  The right would say leave/defund the UN, the left would say keep status quo or make closer ties to UN.

2. Conservatives would say many refugees bring poverty and thus crime into 1st-world nations and sap our welfare systems. Progressives would say they are fleeing for their lives and need our help.  There is truth in both claims. A centrist position would be to bring in refugees that are capable of a decent income, while helping to relocate unskilled/uneducated refugees to a safe country with incomes that match their socioeconomic potential.  The right would say reduce or block refugees, the left would say maintain or increase #'s and help them more inside our countries.

3. Conservatives would say the economy is more important than the environment. Progressives would say the environment is more important than the economy.  Both are important, so centrists would try to balance the two.

Centrist positions are usually (but not always) better than solidly rightwing or leftwing positions. The further you go toward the ideological poles the more unbalanced and incomplete (and thus wrong) positions become, because the more they fail to capture the necessary truths of the opposing side. That's why i'm usually moderate on positions, and why people on the far left and far right are so often wrong.  So wrong in fact that the only way they can keep people supporting their policies is through dictatorship.

1.https://www.centrist.ca/important-issues-self-reliance

"Opt out of non-binding United Nations resolutions that do not benefit Canadians".

2. https://www.centrist.ca/immigration

"Improve the immigration process and integration so that immigrants are set up for success"

"By controlling the type of immigrant that enters Canada, we can ensure that the maximum value is provided to the tax payer and the Canadian economy, while still allowing people to have a better quality of life."

3. https://www.centrist.ca/environment

"The Centrist Party of Canada believes that climate change is a priority and it must be addressed in a practical manner which does not harm the Canadian economy.  "

[Michael Hardner]

17 minutes ago, CentristPartyofCanada said:

L

1. https://www.centrist.ca/immigration

"Improve the immigration process and integration so that immigrants are set up for success"

"By controlling the type of immigrant that enters Canada, we can ensure that the maximum value is provided to the tax payer and the Canadian economy, while still allowing people to have a better quality of life."

2.. https://www.centrist.ca/environment

"The Centrist Party of Canada believes that climate change is a priority and it must be addressed in a practical manner which does not harm the Canadian economy.  "

1. Control how?  Specifically what will you do?

2. 'Harm'  ?  Do you plan to meet climate treaty targets?  Does a revenue neutral tax, in theory, harm the economy?

[CentristPartyofCanada]

14 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Control how?  Specifically what will you do?

2. 'Harm'  ?  Do you plan to meet climate treaty targets?  Does a revenue neutral tax, in theory, harm the economy?

The response is in the very same pages those quotes are from.

1. "The immigration quota needs to be assessed on a yearly basis with an emphasis on economic migrants filling specific positions based on demand."

https://www.centrist.ca/immigration

 2. "Assess placing tariffs on external products from countries that pollute heavily."

"While initiatives like the carbon tax may have merit, Canada is already a relatively green country. The carbon tax doesn't make sense if Canadians are going to keep buying products that originate in countries who seem to not be concerned with environmental stewardship."

https://www.centrist.ca/environment

"The Centrist Party of Canda believes that we must take a proactive approach to climate change. However, the Canadian economy is important for the prosperity of Canada and the transition to a fully renewable energy reliant system should be a progressive process.  While aggressively pursuing alternate energy sources and policies is the right path, this must be done without harming the Canadian economy. The revenue gained from our strong resource export economy should be used to pay down debt and invest in new technology."

https://www.centrist.ca/important-issues-economy

The climate treaty targets are unrealistic. No one will meet them.

Edited April 15, 2020 by CentristPartyofCanada
Formatting.

[Michael Hardner]

11 minutes ago, CentristPartyofCanada said:

The response is in the very same pages those quotes are from.

1. "The immigration quota needs to be assessed on a yearly basis with an emphasis on economic migrants filling specific positions based on demand."

https://www.centrist.ca/immigration

 2. "Assess placing tariffs on external products from countries that pollute heavily."

"While initiatives like the carbon tax may have merit, Canada is already a relatively green country. The carbon tax doesn't make sense if Canadians are going to keep buying products that originate in countries who seem to not be concerned with environmental stewardship."

3. The climate treaty targets are unrealistic. No one will meet them.

1. How is it different from today's approach?  Don't the Conservatives and Liberals do that?

2. Why do you say Canada is relatively Green?  This sounds like a carbon tax on imports, which will also harm the economy.

3. Are you ok with other countries failing to fulfill their treaties also?

[Moonlight Graham]

We should pressure the US, EU, and China to act on climate, and follow their leads.  We make up only 1.5% of global GHG emissions, so doing more than they do will harm us economically and do little to actually help the global problem.  It only makes people "feel good" while putting other Canadians out of work for little reason.  I'm fine with even shutting down the entire oil sands if need be if the global GHG leaders are clamping down domestically just as hard.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

1. We make up only 1.5% of global GHG emissions 

Quote

Search Results

Featured snippet from the web

0.5%

 

Canada ranks 38th by population, comprising about 0.5% of the world's total

 

[bush_cheney2004]

1 hour ago, Moonlight Graham said:

We should pressure the US, EU, and China to act on climate, and follow their leads. 

 

The US is already doing better than Canada.....follow that.