gc1765 Posted March 27, 2007 Report Posted March 27, 2007 So I guess you agree about the percentage of GDP element? Huh? I said GDP went up 2.8%, spending went up 8%. 8% is higher than 2.8% therefore spending is increasing faster than GDP, therefore spending as a percentage of GDP is increasing. Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
geoffrey Posted March 27, 2007 Report Posted March 27, 2007 There are some people who will hate SH no matter what. Unless he/she/it is in Calgary Southwest, anyway, he/she/it has no opportunity to vote for or against Stephen Harper. I have da powa! The electorate didn't seem to think so or they wouldn't have decimated the Conservatives in '93. That was more of the uprising of Reform against Quebec pandering in the West and the Bloc Quebecois itself in Quebec. Neither of those threatens the Conservatives today. They've learnt to compete and(the results of tonight's election show) win against the seperatists. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
geoffrey Posted March 27, 2007 Report Posted March 27, 2007 Huh? I said GDP went up 2.8%, spending went up 8%. 8% is higher than 2.8% therefore spending is increasing faster than GDP, therefore spending as a percentage of GDP is increasing. gc is right here. Government spending is seriously outpacing economic growth. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
jbg Posted March 27, 2007 Report Posted March 27, 2007 I only need one reason not to vote for Stephen Harper. I don't live in his riding. Do I hear an echo? (click) Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jbg Posted March 27, 2007 Report Posted March 27, 2007 Ok...let me rephrase my question: How do you feel about the fact that this "new" government is spending more, as a percentage of GDP, than the previous Liberal government?Cutting spending by shoving costs to the provinces, and de-funding the military is quite easy. It's also gutless. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
gc1765 Posted March 27, 2007 Report Posted March 27, 2007 Cutting spending by shoving costs to the provinces... If provinces want to get rid of the fiscal imbalance, this is the way to do it. Stop spending money on things that are provincial jurisdiction, and let the provinces raise their own taxes. ...and de-funding the military is quite easy. It's also gutless. If Conservative supporters want more funding for the military (or more for provinces) I imagine they want the Conservatives to make cuts in other places. I don't know, just a guess. I'm also guessing they don't like the string of billion dollar spending announcements recently, but hey, I could be wrong. For all the complaining that conservatives do about spending, they don't seem to mind the fact that the Conservatives are spending even more than the Liberals (albeit in slightly different areas). Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
White Doors Posted March 27, 2007 Report Posted March 27, 2007 Huh? I said GDP went up 2.8%, spending went up 8%. 8% is higher than 2.8% therefore spending is increasing faster than GDP, therefore spending as a percentage of GDP is increasing. gc is right here. Government spending is seriously outpacing economic growth. Government, perhaps. But not federal. 90% of the so called 'spending' in the budget was a download of money to the provinces to do with as they pleased. The government of Quebec decided to give a tax cut with it. This is simply the conservatives financially recognizing the reality of the BNA act of 1867. Quote Those Dern Rednecks done outfoxed the left wing again.~blueblood~
ScottSA Posted March 27, 2007 Report Posted March 27, 2007 Government, perhaps. But not federal. 90% of the so called 'spending' in the budget was a download of money to the provinces to do with as they pleased. [] This is simply the conservatives financially recognizing the reality of the BNA act of 1867. That's exactly it. The Tories have a huge surplus, but by far the lion's share of the alleged "largesse" is simply giving it to the provinces, who have always had de jure jurisdiction in the first place. Quote
gc1765 Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 That's exactly it. The Tories have a huge surplus, but by far the lion's share of the alleged "largesse" is simply giving it to the provinces, who have always had de jure jurisdiction in the first place. Even that doesn't account for the increased spending. And how do you feel about Quebec getting the lion's share? Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
Michael Bluth Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 Cutting spending by shoving costs to the provinces, and de-funding the military is quite easy. It's also gutless. Yup, kinda tough to restore Canada's standing in the world with an emaciated military. Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Figleaf Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 "Really? What have they done that's good?" They have restored faith in elected officials to spend our money in an honest and accountable manner. I can't believe you're saying that seriously. A massive bribe to Quebec is not an honest and accountable manner. They have strenghted our criminal justice system. What measure are you refering to? (Surely that's not the current tory doublespeak for stacking the judicial selection panels!) They have reduced the GST by one point. Okay, I'll give you that one. They have provided boosted the esprit de corps of our military. And that one. They have restored a tone of professionalism in our dealings with our most important trading and defence partner. There was no lack of professionalism in that that needed to be restored. What Canadian forelock tuggers like you tories objected to was a lack of deference, not professionalism. They have proven that a minority Government can lead our country with purpose ... PURPOSE!?! Holy Hannah ... ! Quote
Michael Bluth Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 There was no lack of professionalism in that that needed to be restored. A senior staffer in the PMO on tape calling her American counterparts a**holes is professional? A sitting MP from the Government caucus steps on a doll of the President of the United States on public television is professional? What do you consider to be a lack of professionalism? Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Martin Chriton Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 There was no lack of professionalism in that that needed to be restored. A senior staffer in the PMO on tape calling her American counterparts a**holes is professional? A sitting MP from the Government caucus steps on a doll of the President of the United States on public television is professional? What do you consider to be a lack of professionalism? Exactly. While the Conservatives have done some small embarrassing things internationally. The Liberals were much much worse. Insulting/pissing off your largest trading partner over and over again is a really really bad idea. Quote
Canuck E Stan Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 A massive bribe to Quebec is not an honest and accountable manner. A massive bribe? Woo,this is serious stuff. Is this another one the RCMP is going to investigate? Or is it already being investigated? Quote "Any man under 30 who is not a liberal has no heart, and any man over 30 who is not a conservative has no brains." — Winston Churchill
Michael Bluth Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 A massive bribe? Woo,this is serious stuff.Is this another one the RCMP is going to investigate? Or is it already being investigated? Isn't it *obvious*? Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
Figleaf Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 It's amazing the kind of guff you tories take in the name of your party. You don't care that Steve's wasting your money or funding tax cuts in Quebec. You don't mind if Stockwell Day's seat was bought. You're AOK with a Prime Minister who tries to make a virtue of dishonesty. Must be nice. Quote
ScottSA Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 There was no lack of professionalism in that that needed to be restored. A senior staffer in the PMO on tape calling her American counterparts a**holes is professional? A sitting MP from the Government caucus steps on a doll of the President of the United States on public television is professional? What do you consider to be a lack of professionalism? Doing all that while dressed in a pink tutu with a clown's face painted on? Burning an American flag in front of the Speaker's chair and then defecating on it? Shovelling money out the back door of Centre Block into a waiting pickup truck? How dare you think that merely ranting at our largest trading party like drunken hookers "sex trade workers" is somehow unprofessional? Quote
ScottSA Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 "Really? What have they done that's good?" They have restored faith in elected officials to spend our money in an honest and accountable manner. I can't believe you're saying that seriously. A massive bribe to Quebec is not an honest and accountable manner. :lol: Quote
Leafless Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 Wow! I think these are sixty reasons TO VOTE for Stephen Harper. Even the ones about pandering to your favourite province, Quebec? Short term pain for long term gain. Why not! Quote
Who's Doing What? Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 This Govt. Accountable???? LMFAO Ethical? Honest? Equally funny. The only thing this Govt. has maintained since being elected is their two new Mantras "But we're not as bad as the previous Liberal Govt." (fast becoming debatable) and "The Liberals did it too." (pathetic justification, when the CPC ranted on how much better than the Liberals they were) Integrity was the biggest part of their moral campaign. That only lasted a few days until they bought Emerson. The only reasons I needed to not vote for Harper are from his past. The comments made about Canada and his Firewall around Alberta BS, and his worshipping of the American Right-wing pretty much painted an ugly picture. The only worse picture was him in that Cowboy hat. Holy Creepy Batman, hide sheep here comes Happy Harper looking for some lovin'. lol Currently I wouldn't vote for him just from watching him in Question period, plus some of his policies I find are a total joke. He has shown himself to be no different from the previous Govt. and a huge hypocrite (Harpercrite) to boot, engaging in several things he railed against while opposition leader. I like #44 on Garth's list. I wonder how many times he put it on there, then decided he had better bump it down the list. I bet it started off in the top 10, maybe the top 5. Hell in reality it is his #1 reason for doing any of this. Quote Harper differed with his party on some key policy issues; in 1995, for example, he was one of only two Reform MPs to vote in favour of federal legislation requiring owners to register their guns. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/election/bio/harper.html "You've got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society." (Stephen Harper, Report Newsmagazine, January 22, 2001)
Michael Bluth Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 The only reasons I needed to not vote for Harper are from his past. The comments made about Canada and his Firewall around Alberta BS, and his worshipping of the American Right-wing pretty much painted an ugly picture. The only worse picture was him in that Cowboy hat. Holy Creepy Batman, hide sheep here comes Happy Harper looking for some lovin'. lol Have you actually read the firewall letter? I'm guessing not. It just advocates Alberta pushing its constitutional rights to opt out of any number of Federal programs. We will probably end up with an APP to replaces the RCMP soon enough. Worship of the American right wing? I'm sure you have defined that one objectively. You won't vote for him because of his fashion choices? Do explain how that is related to his ability to provide honest, competent government. Quote No one has ever defeated the Liberals with a divided conservative family. - Hon. Jim Prentice
ScottSA Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 This Govt. Accountable????LMFAO Ethical? Honest? Equally funny. The only thing this Govt. has maintained since being elected is their two new Mantras "But we're not as bad as the previous Liberal Govt." (fast becoming debatable) and "The Liberals did it too." (pathetic justification, when the CPC ranted on how much better than the Liberals they were) Integrity was the biggest part of their moral campaign. That only lasted a few days until they bought Emerson. The only reasons I needed to not vote for Harper are from his past. The comments made about Canada and his Firewall around Alberta BS, and his worshipping of the American Right-wing pretty much painted an ugly picture. The only worse picture was him in that Cowboy hat. Holy Creepy Batman, hide sheep here comes Happy Harper looking for some lovin'. lol Currently I wouldn't vote for him just from watching him in Question period, plus some of his policies I find are a total joke. He has shown himself to be no different from the previous Govt. and a huge hypocrite (Harpercrite) to boot, engaging in several things he railed against while opposition leader. I like #44 on Garth's list. I wonder how many times he put it on there, then decided he had better bump it down the list. I bet it started off in the top 10, maybe the top 5. Hell in reality it is his #1 reason for doing any of this. This is just a tired rehash of Liberal talking points from the last election. Pffft. Quote
gc1765 Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 Even the ones about pandering to your favourite province, Quebec? Short term pain for long term gain. Why not! Are you suggesting that Harper has a secret agenda? That is, he is pandering to Quebec in order to gain a majority, and once he receives a majority will govern very differently? Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
Leafless Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 Even the ones about pandering to your favourite province, Quebec? Short term pain for long term gain. Why not! Are you suggesting that Harper has a secret agenda? That is, he is pandering to Quebec in order to gain a majority, and once he receives a majority will govern very differently? You mean like the Liberals? Any PM with an ounce of integrity works for the betterment of the country and not for a select few. Quote
gc1765 Posted March 28, 2007 Report Posted March 28, 2007 You mean like the Liberals? Any PM with an ounce of integrity works for the betterment of the country and not for a select few. Nice deflection. Why don't you answer the original question? Also, does "select few" = Quebec ? Quote Almost three thousand people died needlessly and tragically at the World Trade Center on September 11; ten thousand Africans die needlessly and tragically every single day-and have died every single day since September 11-of AIDS, TB, and malaria. We need to keep September 11 in perspective, especially because the ten thousand daily deaths are preventable. - Jeffrey Sachs (from his book "The End of Poverty")
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.