Solutions to Problems Facing Canada Today

[mowich]

These are some of the major problems as I see them, in Canada today.

 Total and Complete Accountability in the Federal Government

 Health care

 Imbalance of Provincial and Federal Powers

 Aboriginal Accountability

 The Armed Forces (or lack thereof)

 Policing of our borders, especially the North

 A top heavy Public Service

 Crime and Punishment

 Immigration

These are my solutions to the problems.

1. Make every single department/ ministry accountable to an independent body

 Ensure that all ministers of government are held accountable for their actions

2. Ensure efficient access by providing both private and public health care administered by a public body and payable through our medical insurance

3. Off-load responsibilities to the provinces in jurisdictions that are much better addressed by people in the area who know most about the problems and possible solutions.

4. Negotiate Aboriginal self –government, enshrine their right to own property, and then hold them responsible for paying taxes.

5. Double the size of our Armed Forces, increase the size of our reserves, equip them to all modern standards, and most especially provide them with salaries and housing that befits their contribution to the protection of our country.

6. Arm all of our border guards after enrolling them in courses that encompass all the possible situations they may face in their duties.

7. Implement a job by job review of all positions within the Public Service and eliminate all unnecessary positions, make them accountable for their work.

8. Move Federal prisons to the North for the most violent of criminals. Put the criminals to work building and maintaining facilities for the Armed Forces; which will be stationed there on a rotational basis, to guard against infiltration by foreign interests. A life sentence is just that, a life sentence no chance for parole or early release.

9. Put in place programs in foreign countries that educate all prospective immigrants to the rules, regulations and necessary documents for entry into our country. In addition, have policies in place, which thoroughly screen all immigrants for any hint of ties to terrorist organizations. Institute programs that facilitate the process for all immigrants with documented professions and skills.

[Melanie_]

How do you plan to pay for all that?

[geoffrey]

How do you plan to pay for all that?

Sell our children. Then we don't have to worry about child care either.

[fellowtraveller]

You can be sure that they will all be subordinate to national unity before the year ends.

[geoffrey]

You can be sure that they will all be subordinate to national unity before the year ends.

Is this because Quebecois 'hate' Harper?

If so, the polls reflect they must really 'hate' the Liberals!

[fellowtraveller]

You can be sure that they will all be subordinate to national unity before the year ends.

Is this because Quebecois 'hate' Harper?

If so, the polls reflect they must really 'hate' the Liberals!

No, it's because the time is still right for another referendum.

The Bloc will likely increase their Commons seats.

People in Quebec are pissed at Canada.

Because the PQ have a young, charisamtic leader.

Because there will be an election in Quebec next year, and the PQ will likely win.

When they do, they'll hold a referendum.

They might win.

If they win, they'll leave Canada, and leave very quickly indeed.

That is why.

There are a few 'ifs' in this scenario, starting with the results next Monday. The path is not quite as easy for Duceppe as it was a couple of months ago. But nothing really has changed.

Within 12 months, the headlines will be national unity 24/7.

[Black Dog]

No, it's because the time is still right for another referendum.

The Bloc will likely increase their Commons seats.

People in Quebec are pissed at Canada.

Because the PQ have a young, charisamtic leader.

Because there will be an election in Quebec next year, and the PQ will likely win.

When they do, they'll hold a referendum.

They might win.

If they win, they'll leave Canada, and leave very quickly indeed.

I'll stop you right at that last point above. Quebec's separation will not be quick. A soverignist referendum win will only be the begginning of a long, drawn out and ugly process of haggling, cajoling, threatining and horse-trading. My gut tells me that Quebec would use such a win to milk as many concessions out of the federal government and the R.O.C. as they can, which I'm pretty sure has been the goal all along.

[fellowtraveller]

I'll stop you right at that last point above. Quebec's separation will not be quick. A soverignist referendum win will only be the begginning of a long, drawn out and ugly process of haggling, cajoling, threatining and horse-trading. My gut tells me that Quebec would use such a win to milk as many concessions out of the federal government and the R.O.C. as they can, which I'm pretty sure has been the goal all along.

I'd agree with you if this were January 2005. But it is not. The PQ formally adopted the process I described in June, 2005. All the PQ leadership candidates including the winner, M. Boisclair, endorsed the strategy described in my post.: declaration of independence, then talks with the other country -Canada. They will negotiate, but as a sovereign nation, not a disgruntled subordinate province.

Which changes everything, don't you think?

But it may not get that far, and the reason is the slight resurgence of federalism behind the Tories. Duceppe was wringing his hands in glee at the prospect of a Liberal minority, the perfect storm for separation. Paul Martin was the absolute ideal Liberal for Duceppe to flay for the year or so leading to the Quebec election. Harper, especially if he can come through quickly on some reforms, will be an opponent of an entirely different magnitude. Even as a Tory minority, it is a different game entirely.

[Black Dog]

I'd agree with you if this were January 2005. But it is not. The PQ formally adopted the process I described in June, 2005. All the PQ leadership candidates including the winner, M. Boisclair, endorsed the strategy described in my post.: declaration of independence, then talks with the other country -Canada. They will negotiate, but as a sovereign nation, not a disgruntled subordinate province.

Which changes everything, don't you think?

Not really. It's just rhetoric. I simply can't see Quebec existing as a truly soveriegn nation. And they know it.

[geoffrey]

Not really. It's just rhetoric. I simply can't see Quebec existing as a truly soveriegn nation. And they know it.

Theres alot of Quebecois that disagree. Besides their share of the debt, they really already have alot of the institutions ready to go over there. They will be poor, economically depressed and in sad sad shape for awhile yes, but they can and will do it if they want to.

Then they'll have a referendum to rejoin Canada 10 years later. And then we'll vote no to take them back.

[Blackguard]

Hello,

In 2005 the Parti Québécois published a document that demonstrated that an independant Québec would generate a surplus on the first year, and a surplus of 5 billions after 5 years. According to this document, the State of Quebec will do better economically as an independant country than as a federal province of Canada.

You can read the document in English on the Parti Québecois website here :

http://www.pq.org/tmp2005/finances_english.pdf

The reason of sovereignty is not only economic one. It is a question that the people of Quebec need to resolve for themselves. Do they want to take their destiny in their own hands, or do they want to continue to participate in the Canadian federation.

I don't undestand comments such as Black Dog's :

"I simply can't see Quebec existing as a truly soveriegn nation. And they know it."

Keep in mind that more than 49% of Quebequers voted for sovereignty in 1995. It was a very close call. Would it have been different without all the money put in by the federal governement? Without the fast-paced inclusion of immigrants granted citizenship voting rights in Quebec on the premise that they would vote No during the referendum? It might very well have. That's what Parizeau was talking about in his bit about "money and ethnic votes" after the referendum.

The possibility of sovereignty for Quebec is a very real, democratic process.

Then they'll have a referendum to rejoin Canada 10 years later. And then we'll vote no to take them back.

The people of Quebec will all go to Ottawa and have a big rally, saying "We love you Canada!". It worked the other arround didn't it?

Maybe Canada should take the initiative, instead of waiting, and have a referendum to exclude Quebec from Canada

[Montgomery Burns]

How do you plan to pay for all that?

By lowering taxes and getting the economy rocking and rolling like the USA (4.7% unemployment rate vs. 6.6% in Canada).

Like most leftwingers, you think there is a finite amount of goods and services. Wrong. Look at how successful Alberta is. Look at the revenue the US govt is taking in.

Imagine lopping off 1 percentage point of Canada's unemployment rate--about 175,000 people off the "dole", more people paying taxes and more people paying CPP and EI--which helps all of us.

[geoffrey]

How do you plan to pay for all that?

By lowering taxes and getting the economy rocking and rolling like the USA (4.7% unemployment rate vs. 6.6% in Canada).

Like most leftwingers, you think there is a finite amount of goods and services. Wrong. Look at how successful Alberta is. Look at the revenue the US govt is taking in.

Imagine lopping off 1 percentage point of Canada's unemployment rate--about 175,000 people off the "dole", more people paying taxes and more people paying CPP and EI--which helps all of us.

Dangerous Monty, very dangerous.

I'm with ya that our taxes in Canada are in general too high and we have far too generous social assistance.

However, the argument that cutting taxes to a deficit position, hoping that increased tax revenue will pay for itself is what hurt the whole Reaganomics idea.

There is clearly a maximum tax rate before the economy feels pressure. I see no problem with hiding out just under that, maintain some social programs such as healthcare (privately delivered of course, and maybe operating under a crown corporation insurance co.) and bare minimum welfare.

Another factor in our high unemployment is the Bank of Canada's refusal to let that inflation slip up a bit. We could live with a 3.5% inflation rate, especially if it lopped off 1 or 2 percent off the unemployment numbers.

That would destroy Alberta, however, as we crash into the most unbelievable labour shortage possible, to the point where labour gets prohibitively expensive and projects fail (which we are already too close to). Each Province needs it own bank!

[concerned citizen]

Dangerous Monty, very dangerous.

I'm with ya that our taxes in Canada are in general too high and we have far too generous social assistance.

I take it you've never needed any social assistance, cause that is the biggest crock I've ever seen or heard. EI gives you a small percentage of your wages in the event of a job loss. I'm not even taking home 1/2 of what I was making when I was working. I've been looking for work for over 8 months to no avail.

There are no programs to retrain me, I can't get the language training necessary (French) and if GOD forbid I don't find a job before my EI runs out and I need to go on Ontario Works I wouldn't get enough money to cover my rent! And I live in the slums of my town, cheapest rent to be found anywhere. Building should be condemned really.

Now to add on to all of this that I have medical conditions in which I need to take medication in order to live. I have no coverage, the gov't won't help because the programs that are available take into account your previous years income and I wouldn't be able to pay the deductibles (Trillium program).

So now (and no I'm not dramatizing this) I get to have a slow, painful, agonizing death because of our lack of assistance available.

And you call it too generous. Ya Right

[Montgomery Burns]

How do you plan to pay for all that?

By lowering taxes and getting the economy rocking and rolling like the USA (4.7% unemployment rate vs. 6.6% in Canada).

Like most leftwingers, you think there is a finite amount of goods and services. Wrong. Look at how successful Alberta is. Look at the revenue the US govt is taking in.

Imagine lopping off 1 percentage point of Canada's unemployment rate--about 175,000 people off the "dole", more people paying taxes and more people paying CPP and EI--which helps all of us.

Dangerous Monty, very dangerous.

I'm with ya that our taxes in Canada are in general too high and we have far too generous social assistance.

However, the argument that cutting taxes to a deficit position, hoping that increased tax revenue will pay for itself is what hurt the whole Reaganomics idea.

There is clearly a maximum tax rate before the economy feels pressure. I see no problem with hiding out just under that, maintain some social programs such as healthcare (privately delivered of course, and maybe operating under a crown corporation insurance co.) and bare minimum welfare.

Another factor in our high unemployment is the Bank of Canada's refusal to let that inflation slip up a bit. We could live with a 3.5% inflation rate, especially if it lopped off 1 or 2 percent off the unemployment numbers.

That would destroy Alberta, however, as we crash into the most unbelievable labour shortage possible, to the point where labour gets prohibitively expensive and projects fail (which we are already too close to). Each Province needs it own bank!

The only dangerous thing is our high taxation which is what has hurt our economy and growth. Our numbers are embarrassing compared to the US--no matter how much Canadians brag about "the best economy ever". Time for us to set our standards higher.

Reagan proved that lowering taxes gets the economy rolling. Compare the Reagan years to the Carter years. It also worked for Dubya. After the dotcom bubble burst, the 2 major financial scandals, and the 9-11 attack, unemployment had went up to 6.4% (which Canadians call the best ever) and some were calling for his head. He implemented 2 tax cuts and now their GDP growth is unbelieveably high, unemployment has dropped to 4.7%, and as stated in the thread I started in the US Section of MLW, the US govt took in an amazing 14.5% more in revenues last year.

Lowering taxes turned Ireland around where they are now one of the most successful economies in Europe--and Estonia has figured out that lower taxes has got their economy rolling.

You also have to take into consideration Canada's dirty little secret which we don't like to talk about, because it would hurt our whole "we're superior to them". We have a braindrain to the US; we are losing our best and brightest to the US where the govt allows you to keep your own money. Indeed, this happens in my very own province, as Saskabushers best and brightest flee to low-tax Alberta.

Labor is getting expensive in Alberta, but the free market and business will take care of that. Already some businesses in Alberta are offering assistance to people so they can get more skilled workers and lower the wages.

[Montgomery Burns]

Dangerous Monty, very dangerous.

I'm with ya that our taxes in Canada are in general too high and we have far too generous social assistance.

I take it you've never needed any social assistance, cause that is the biggest crock I've ever seen or heard. EI gives you a small percentage of your wages in the event of a job loss. I'm not even taking home 1/2 of what I was making when I was working. I've been looking for work for over 8 months to no avail.

There are no programs to retrain me, I can't get the language training necessary (French) and if GOD forbid I don't find a job before my EI runs out and I need to go on Ontario Works I wouldn't get enough money to cover my rent! And I live in the slums of my town, cheapest rent to be found anywhere. Building should be condemned really.

Now to add on to all of this that I have medical conditions in which I need to take medication in order to live. I have no coverage, the gov't won't help because the programs that are available take into account your previous years income and I wouldn't be able to pay the deductibles (Trillium program).

So now (and no I'm not dramatizing this) I get to have a slow, painful, agonizing death because of our lack of assistance available.

And you call it too generous. Ya Right

I'm sorry to hear about your medical condition, but the rest of your post is a crock. Do you think EI should pay you the same amount as you made when you were working?

Looking for a job for 8 months and can't find one? I was on EI (UI back then) once in my life and I found a job within 3 weeks--and I live in a have-not province. I would have taken almost anything to get off UI and make a higher wage. Why is learning French necessary for an Ontarioan? Sounds like you are unwilling to take a job unless it is the certain job you want. There's lots of ppl with medical conditions and lots of disabled ppl who take what they can.

Welfare pays too much. By the time you take into consdideration that they are subsidized for nearly everything (utilities, training, etc), they take in just as much money as a lower-waged person. They even get free schooling. I had to pay for mine. All you have to do in my province to collect welfare is to phone teh govt. You don't even have to physically go see them and apply. Giving too much welfare discourages ppl from working. I see lots of unemployed able-bodied ppl able to work, but where is the incentive if the govt will pay you to sit at home, get drunk, and go out and commit robberies from ppl who are working?

Look at how successful Europe is with their generous welfare system. It's killing them.

[concerned citizen]

Dangerous Monty, very dangerous.

I'm with ya that our taxes in Canada are in general too high and we have far too generous social assistance.

I take it you've never needed any social assistance, cause that is the biggest crock I've ever seen or heard. EI gives you a small percentage of your wages in the event of a job loss. I'm not even taking home 1/2 of what I was making when I was working. I've been looking for work for over 8 months to no avail.

There are no programs to retrain me, I can't get the language training necessary (French) and if GOD forbid I don't find a job before my EI runs out and I need to go on Ontario Works I wouldn't get enough money to cover my rent! And I live in the slums of my town, cheapest rent to be found anywhere. Building should be condemned really.

Now to add on to all of this that I have medical conditions in which I need to take medication in order to live. I have no coverage, the gov't won't help because the programs that are available take into account your previous years income and I wouldn't be able to pay the deductibles (Trillium program).

So now (and no I'm not dramatizing this) I get to have a slow, painful, agonizing death because of our lack of assistance available.

And you call it too generous. Ya Right

I'm sorry to hear about your medical condition, but the rest of your post is a crock. Do you think EI should pay you the same amount as you made when you were working?

Looking for a job for 8 months and can't find one? I was on EI (UI back then) once in my life and I found a job within 3 weeks--and I live in a have-not province. I would have taken almost anything to get off UI and make a higher wage. Why is learning French necessary for an Ontarioan? Sounds like you are unwilling to take a job unless it is the certain job you want. There's lots of ppl with medical conditions and lots of disabled ppl who take what they can.

Welfare pays too much. By the time you take into consdideration that they are subsidized for nearly everything (utilities, training, etc), they take in just as much money as a lower-waged person. They even get free schooling. I had to pay for mine. All you have to do in my province to collect welfare is to phone teh govt. You don't even have to physically go see them and apply. Giving too much welfare discourages ppl from working. I see lots of unemployed able-bodied ppl able to work, but where is the incentive if the govt will pay you to sit at home, get drunk, and go out and commit robberies from ppl who are working?

Look at how successful Europe is with their generous welfare system. It's killing them.

My post isn't a crock and I have issues with some of the things that you are saying.

1. Welfare isn't generous. I'm thinking you aren't in Ontario. As a single male I would get 520 a month. Being single I'm at the end of the line when it comes to subsidized housing. You speak of training. They will only pay for high school education which I already have. Yep that's real generous there. We are entitled to a certain standard of living by the United Nations. Canada agrees to it by being part of the united nations and I think that maybe just maybe we could put a little money back into the system because Mike Harris cut it back too far. I'm not saying to have a life and live high on the hog, I'm saying I'd like to have a roof over my head, food in my stomach and a telephone to use for job search. (Welfare DOE NOT consider the phone an essential, it is considered a luxury)

2. French language training. Seems to me you're probably in a province that doesn't have much of a bilingual population. I live in Cornwall. Ontario where for almost any job you are required to speak French because 1/2 the town is french.

Congrats on finding a job within 3 weeks, but I bet if you had a criminal record (like I do) that it would have taken you longer. Also with all of my medical conditions there is a limit on what I can do. If I was just a little more limited then I could be given a disability pension but according to the gov't I'm not disabled enough.

Don't know if you've been looking for work lately but just about everything nowadays either has a check box on the application under the question of "Have you ever been convicted of a criminal offense for which a pardon has not been granted" or they ask for a criminal background check outright. It's the latest fad as everyone wants perfection.

Now I'll admit I was a stupid young boy who was conned by an older woman - you get the picture but that was 10 years ago. I'm a much different person now but no one sees that, they see a checked mark box on an application that immediately disqualifies you. And please don't get me started on the pardon process. Long and expensive.

Employment Insurance should be privatized or optional. I'm not saying that I should be getting what I was making but I am saying I should be getting at least 50%. I have other insurance for bills that is paying out more per month than what I'm getting and the premiums were cheaper. They also cover for a longer period of time than EI.

EI is ok but the gov't is using it to fund their surpluses instead of what it was actually meant to do.