Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
This is where we have the point of departure though. The Wildrose isn't fiscally conservative. (Its a poor label to begin with, as every party would say that they are). Instead the plan is to cut spending and delivery of services along with infrastructure. This is purely to keep taxes low, which is an ideological bent, but not a sensible policy for the future. The shocking thing though is that none of this is costed. I've asked the party (as you know) when we can see a line by line breakdown and had no response. Some of us refer to that line-by-line breakdown more commonly as a "budget".
|
Fiscal Conservative is only a poor label if you want to discredit it. Generally, being fiscally conservative contains elements of this:
- no deficit spending
- balanced budgets
- deregulation of economy
- reduction of government spending
- low taxes
Jeesh, it looks pretty much like the Wildrose Platform!! And yes, clearly they are the only party representing these ideas.
As for a budget, just because you don't like their numbers doesn't mean they arent there. You can keep railing on and on about how they don't have every item costed line by line, but the only party with a full budget, the PC's, is clearly based on false projections and assumptions. So whatever.
Quote:
|
As for the socially moderate that has to be a joke. In a party where candidates have written articles saying that the church should decide who should be allowed to be married I fail to see how you can make that claim. That is a large concern for me; rather see a separation of chruch and state you have candidates who actually want the church to make societal decisions for us. I'm not sure how that jives with the libertarians in the party, but it has to be an uneasy coaltion.
|
You mean the Wildrose Party allows members to have their own opinions? The SHAME! Apparently they should not allow anyone to speak their opinion without first clearing the party approval? Or maybe, we should respect the opinions of everyone and then judge the party based upon their actual policy, which is the reflection of all members and not just one or two people (IE: Nanny Redford almost having half her caucus quit over her .05 law).
Bottom line is, the Wildrose welcomes many viewpoints and encourages those viewpoints to be heard, even if some may disagree, with the understanding that the party will reflect the will of its members and thus far that has been a very libertarian live and let live approach.
Muffling viewpoints is not socially moderate, no matter how you paint it.