OT: Liberal Minority

[Grizzly]

quote:I'm a serving member of the Armed Forces reserve. We would rather take Iraq over serving as one of you "boy scouts". We didn't sign up to sit back and do nothing.

Doyle I am quite impressed that you have taken it upon yourself to speak for the whole Canadian Armed Forces. As a former member myself let me inform you that I and most of the other soldiers I met signed up to defend Canada and possibly other countries if unjustly threatened. I certainly did not sign up to risk my life to support the imperialistic ambitions and adventures of an incompetent president who is willing to risk the lives of his own citizens in order to line his own pockets and those of his oil baron and military manufacturer friends. However, if you are bored sitting around being a "boy scout" in peaceful Canada why don't you sign up for one of the mercenary forces also known as contractors. I heard they are currently looking for people and that there is a lot of money to be made as well as a lot of action to be had. I think you would probably fit in better with this lot anyway and I would certainly feel better knowing that a person of your views is serving his master in the US rather than in an organization charged with defending Canadian sovereignty.

[devioustrevor]

quote:Originally posted by jonovision

I'm pretty pleased with the result. I didn't want the Conservatives to govern, but I think most Canadians wanted to see the Liberals taken down a peg.

Of course, I personally voted for the Green Party so I can't take any credit for it.

My thoughts exactly, and I too voted for the Green Party. Just as I did in the Ontario provincial elections in the fall. I really like their ideas about net metering and and extra taxes on polluting chemicals.

[Guest Jeffery S.]

quote:Originally posted by Grizzly

Doyle I am quite impressed that you have taken it upon yourself to speak for the whole Canadian Armed Forces. As a former member myself let me inform you that I and most of the other soldiers I met signed up to defend Canada and possibly other countries if unjustly threatened. I certainly did not sign up to risk my life to support the imperialistic ambitions and adventures of an incompetent president who is willing to risk the lives of his own citizens in order to line his own pockets and those of his oil baron and military manufacturer friends. However, if you are bored sitting around being a "boy scout" in peaceful Canada why don't you sign up for one of the mercenary forces also known as contractors. I heard they are currently looking for people and that there is a lot of money to be made as well as a lot of action to be had. I think you would probably fit in better with this lot anyway and I would certainly feel better knowing that a person of your views is serving his master in the US rather than in an organization charged with defending Canadian sovereignty.

I wonder if Doyle takes your advice and becomes a contractor him losing his head will make any difference to his posts on this board?

And I happen to be one of those rare people on the left that support a strong armed forces, well-equipped for peace and war, and with a greater accountability to Canadian society.

But I have an idea: if Doyle and his likes are really keen for action, maybe they can be called in to lay down real grass at the Skydome everytime Toronto gets to host an international match. An advantage of this proposal: they have uniforms available that are already the right colour.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Grizzly

Doyle I am quite impressed that you have taken it upon yourself to speak for the whole Canadian Armed Forces. As a former member myself let me inform you that I and most of the other soldiers I met signed up to defend Canada and possibly other countries if unjustly threatened. I certainly did not sign up to risk my life to support the imperialistic ambitions and adventures of an incompetent president who is willing to risk the lives of his own citizens in order to line his own pockets and those of his oil baron and military manufacturer friends. However, if you are bored sitting around being a "boy scout" in peaceful Canada why don't you sign up for one of the mercenary forces also known as contractors. I heard they are currently looking for people and that there is a lot of money to be made as well as a lot of action to be had. I think you would probably fit in better with this lot anyway and I would certainly feel better knowing that a person of your views is serving his master in the US rather than in an organization charged with defending Canadian sovereignty.

Such a shame you had to use such words. Try and step into the real world for once. If you feel such, why are we in Afghanistan in the first palace. It's a "war for oil" too isn't it?

quote:Originally posted by JefferyS.

I wonder if Doyle takes your advice and becomes a contractor him losing his head will make any difference to his posts on this board?

And I happen to be one of those rare people on the left that support a strong armed forces, well-equipped for peace and war, and with a greater accountability to Canadian society.

But I have an idea: if Doyle and his likes are really keen for action, maybe they can be called in to lay down real grass at the Skydome everytime Toronto gets to host an international match. An advantage of this proposal: they have uniforms available that are already the right colour.

Sadly, we've been more than accountable to people like you.

Yet people like you keep stabbing us in the back.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Blue and White Army

I voted Green as well. Nice to see they will receive federal party funding for receiving more than 4% of the vote.

Wonder how they did it. Last time the federal Greens had something like 0.08%... only some 1,100 votes. This time, more than a million people supported them.

The Greens got over 500,000. It's still enough for federal funding, which is somthing I don't support when it comes to political parties.

[Marc]

quote:Originally posted by Grizzly

The Greens did not and will not join with the NDP because they are not a left wing party.

Righto, but, the previous poster's point does have merit.

Many Canadians aren't fully informed of the party platforms, especially the Green platform, with many voting for the Green name/brand and not the policies and political orientation. A lot of Green support was siphoned from the NDP in this election - mainly that small, uninformed quasi-enviro protest vote. Some of that vote (not all, of course) would have gone to the NDP. You must wonder if any Greens in Oshawa, Palliser, and New Westminster-Coquitlam (and less so Hamilton-East, Hamilton-Centre, and Trinity-Spadina) are reconsidering their vote now. Of course, the same could be said for many New Democrats who made the difference in Lib-Con ridings or Liberals who made the difference in Con-NDP ridings, although the situations there deal with established parties, and are somewhat different.

As their popularity grows, the Greens will take less and less support from NDP circles and more from Liberals and Conservatives. The current Greens want to reduce progressive taxation and increase sales taxes to curb consumption, something that is dead set against NDP policy (theoretically, at least). The two parties would never merge, although to be honest half of the Green exec and their former leader did join the NDP when the Greens swung from left to quasi-right. The other edge of the sword of media spotlight is that as the party grows, and its positions become clearer, it will also bleed some of that enviro-protest support back to the NDP (and to marginal parties and non-votes) as more light is shed on its platform.

I wouldn't cast my ballot for their current incarnation (or their previous one), but the Greens deserve credit for being a positive voice in Canada politics so far. In a PR system, they'd be an even better influence.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by wbn1000

I think this is one of the problems right there....

The question what is a conservative has different answers depending on where you live. From Newfoundland to Quebec and large swaths of Ontario, plus in certain urban centres in Western Canada (namely Winnipeg) the term conservative seems to apply to those with centre-right or moderate right views (i.e. Progressive Conservatism or Red Toryism). In small sections of Ontario, rural Manitoba, and the rest of Western Canada, a conservative is one with a strong right wing (i.e. the new Conservatives or the old Reform/Alliance) viewpoint pure and simple.

By running from a strong right wing position, the Conservatives ignored the realities of Central and Eastern Canadian politics and the historical traditions of Canadian conservatism. The fact is, 80+% of the Canadian electorate is in the centre and will not tolerate strong right (or left) wing platforms and policies.

I was a supporter of the PC party, but could not tolerate many of the social policies of the new Conservatives, (rightly or wrongly I was suspicious of the unspoken parts of their platform and remembered previous statements by Harper et al). I also didn't want to vote Liberal, although they now closely match most of my current views, because of Adscam, the HR boondoggle, etc, etc, etc. In the end I voted Green because their platform was mostly acceptable to me and I wanted to help a new mainstream party get off the ground. Plus, in the Winnipeg riding of Elmwood-Transcona it didn't matter who I voted for, so punishing the Liberals was a safe vote.

Should be an interesting next 9-15 months before the next election...

Now back to soccer.

What's sad is that people actually beleive that. We had a wide range of candidates that did run in the election. We had a large number of minority candidates and we even had some openly gay candidates as well. We elected a diverse and even young caucus to represent the Conservative Party. My MP, Rahim Jaffer, is only 32 but has been in parliament for several years now.

It seems more that people will let their old fears take over rather than look at the issue with an open mind.

[Cheeta]

Don't know what it would take to upseat Father Bill. Good union man with a long history in the riding. And he can torture a few tunes out of the Great Highland Pipes. Gotta love the gentle giant.

Think a lot of people who voted Green did it just to hope they'd reach that magical 2% threshhold. People have voted in certain directions for worse reasons.

Curious business we got here. No run offs. Winner's the first over the finish line. Am actualy okay with that. Proportional representation dosen't work for me. Run off elections dosen't work for me.

A riding represenative to parliment? Now that works just fine so far as I'm concearned.

And I'll even put up with the Senate as it is rather than start some crazy constitutional arguements.

[Joe Concacaf]

I don't mind Paul Martin that much, I'm sure he's a nice guy, but why do all of our Prime Ministers (except for the interim ones) have to be lawyers from Quebec?

Maybe we should have some sort of rotating system like they had in Yugoslavia or something...

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by Joe Concacaf

I don't mind Paul Martin that much, I'm sure he's a nice guy, but why do all of our Prime Ministers (except for the interim ones) have to be lawyers from Quebec?

Maybe we should have some sort of rotating system like they had in Yugoslavia or something...

Quebec couldn't stand losing all that power.

[Canadienfan]

I would have been willing to kick the Guatemalan National team goalie in the throat to assure a green party victory in my riding!

[Gian-Luca]

quote:Originally posted by Marc

As their popularity grows, the Greens will take less and less support from NDP circles and more from Liberals and Conservatives. The current Greens want to reduce progressive taxation and increase sales taxes to curb consumption

If that is their policy I doubt that the party will continue to grow. I'm sure your average citizen just loves the thought of paying even more in sales tax.

[Marc]

Depends, they won't raise them all across the board, which, as you noted, is political suicide. They'll be more specific, raising gas taxes (10 cents a litre more), as well as sales taxes on luxuries, big pollutants, unecessary consumables (junk food) and other stuff like that.

[Jarrek]

I won't raise your taxes, but I won't lower them either.

[Free kick]

I remember a university economics prof during one of his lectures making a good case for having all income taxes eliminated and replaced by sales taxes only. His reasoning was that one should only be taxed for what they take out from society and not for what one contributes.

When you really think about, theoretically of course, it makes sence. Income taxes are applied to what you contibute and create through your efforts and Hard work. Sales taxes are applied to what you consume. Should you not be taxed on what you consume and take out from the economy or society. Consumption does contribute to economic growth in GDP but on the other hand it does have a social cost and the sales taxes would relflect that. Sales taxes are not progressive like income taxes ( ie>; as % they do not increase with you earnings like income tax), but on the other hand higher earners consume more so they would pay more to the state. Unlike that silly flat income tax proposal that people like Peter Pockligton wanted to institute. Plus, this this would be an incentive for people to save. So in theory it makes sence.

But in practice, I wonder how costly and what kind of size of a bureaucracy would be needed for administer and collect this. Plus would it stay fixed at certain % accross all goods and services? It might become a nightmare to figure out that a tax on a certain luxury item mght be X% and and other good Y% That could become a nightmare.

[Marc]

Higher earners don't necessarily consume more, they consume different things than low incomes. And even where they do consume more, the proportion of their consumption to the consumption of the lower incomes would continue to make the tax regressive and unfair to the lower-income sectors of society, who would still be paying more than their fair share.

Also, deciding what is taxed to what level would be a bureaucratic nightmare, as you suggest. Revenue based solely on consumer spending would also make funding very unstable for government programs.

Interesting concept though.

[Free kick]

Yes, you raised a good point about instable funding. I forgot to mention that bit as one of the drawbacks. You would definitely have revenues from taxation fluctuating with consumption levels. Recessions would would yield lower tax revenues. But would regressive part or you concern not be addressed by having a higher sales tax percent applied to those goods and services that high income earners consume.

[BC supporter]

Should let this (off) topic go, but having just returned after having been out of BC for the past couple weeks, I can't resist a comment.

Big story of the election, in my view, is that after weeks of concentrated media attention the voter turnout barely broke 60%. Must admit I'm increasingly sympathetic to those who don't see any point in voting, although in the end I cast my ballot for the NDP.

Sad to see the governing party able to claim validation, and equally dissaffecting to see them unchallenged in what seems their divine right to slowly inch the country toward a vague and uninspiring future.

I'm off the soapbox now.

[devioustrevor]

Compared to many Western Countries, a 60% turnout is actually pretty good. For the last US Presidential election I think it was under 50%

[Marc]

quote:Originally posted by Free kick

But would regressive part or you concern not be addressed by having a higher sales tax percent applied to those goods and services that high income earners consume.

Hmmm partially, yeah, it would. It would never be as progressive as the income tax system though. And on those goods that all people consume, the lower incomes would be hit the hardest. I'd assume the system would also limit personal investment in upper-end goods in the sense with the higher taxes on 'high-income' products would prevent those on low incomes from ever acquiring them - accentuating the already existing glass ceiling effect.

You know though I had never thought of this system though. First I've heard of the 'sales only' tax system. I guess that's closest to what we had ages ago before income taxes were brought in a as 'temporary' measure.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by devioustrevor

Compared to many Western Countries, a 60% turnout is actually pretty good. For the last US Presidential election I think it was under 50%

Look at Europe, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand before you say that.

[DoyleG]

quote:Originally posted by devioustrevor

Compared to many Western Countries, a 60% turnout is actually pretty good. For the last US Presidential election I think it was under 50%

Look at Europe, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand before you say that.

[Guest Ed]

quote:Originally posted by devioustrevor

Compared to many Western Countries, a 60% turnout is actually pretty good. For the last US Presidential election I think it was under 50%

What a stupid comment. Do some research. WTF does the US Presidential election have to do with our parliamentary system?

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by Ed

What a stupid comment. Do some research. WTF does the US Presidential election have to do with our parliamentary system?

Why aren't comparaisons valid. I agree that the 60% could be much better. But IT REALLY IS MUCH BETTER than the turnout in the the US and many European countries where there is alot of apathy. Whether its in a parliamentary system or not is irrelevant. We are talking democracy and the democratic duty of its citizens to participate. You must have misread the comments somehow.

[Guest Ed]

Most democratic countries average over 70%, England, until recently over that as well. Australia and New Zealand which typically over 75%, which both have parliamentary system. I didn't misread anything. The past few federal elections have brought our average down, not surprising since the election was for all intent over before many in the west even got to their polling stations. But 60% is not 'actually pretty good'. The USA is widely known to be one of the worst democracies in terms of voter turnout.