40th Canadian Federal Election - Welcome to another Conservative Minority (whee!)

[JiriHrdina]

Originally Posted by evman150

It's really too bad, if Ignatieff or Kennedy was chosen instead of Dion, (I think) we'd be talking Liberal majority.

I don't actually mind Dion. But I do realize he lacks any sort of appeal to pretty much everybody in the country.

Yup which is why the Grits should be happy an election has been called. They will never win with Dion - so they need to go through this process so they can move on to someone else ASAP.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

I agree 100%, I don't think that the general population of Canada has ever called upon the military to help with issues such as forest fires, floods, ice storms and the like... Defending the northern territories? Plus I don't know helping to ensure your freedom to make such outlandish statements in the first place.

The liberal government plundered the military for years which resulted in the armed forces being a joke even to those in the army.... hell I have heard stories about soldiers having to do fundraising at malls... for a developed nation that is unexcusable. The Liberal government's horrible policies put troops on the ground in Afghanistan when they weren't prepared to be in the country in terms of equipment.... something that Canada is still playing catchup for and likely will be for decades to come.

The first part is just semantics. Why not pare it down to some sort of emergency response task force? Obviously that's valuable to the Canadian public, but it doesn't have to be the military's job.

"Ensuring [our] freedom"...no. They don't do that, sorry. Army types like to get all high and mighty, when really the truth is they don't ensure our freedom at all. It's all just bluster. Canadian soldiers killing some Afghans does nothing for me. Absolutely nothing but waste my tax dollars.

"Defending the north"...from penguins? From those pesky reds? This doesn't need to be the military either, just like the emergency thing.

As for Afghanistan, it's a joke we ever went there in the first place. That was the colossal blunder.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by evman150

Ya I don't know why you feel that way either. Because it's a very ignorant position.

The italicized part is a short term/long term fallacy by the way (a subset of the excluded middle/false dichotomy fallacy).

You try to sound smart without coming off as smart at all. Instead of drive-by insults, why not elucidate your position for us all? I, myself, being a bit of a libertarian see no moral reasons to consider marijuana an illegal substance, however, I doubt there is a convincing economic argument.

[evman150]

"Forestry added $10 billion to B.C.'s GDP in 2005, the construction industry another $7.9 billion and according to police sources, the marijuana trade claims third spot, boasting annual sales of $7.5 billion. Big business indeed."

http://www.medicalmarihuana.ca/bcbud.html

(Obviously the source is dodgy, it`s just the first hit on google.)

British Columbia isn`t getting its piece of that $7.5B pie.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by evman150

"Forestry added $10 billion to B.C.'s GDP in 2005, the construction industry another $7.9 billion and according to police sources, the marijuana trade claims third spot, boasting annual sales of $7.5 billion. Big business indeed."

http://www.medicalmarihuana.ca/bcbud.html

(Obviously the source is dodgy, it`s just the first hit on google.)

British Columbia isn`t getting its piece of that $7.5B pie.

First hit on google? Nice work.

I'd like to find out how it is possible to estimate even a general assumption about a market that is almost entirely hidden. Even if that source makes a legit guess, a percentage of 7.5 billion is hardly an economic solution to anything. What a joke.

[evman150]

I`m going to admit right now I`m no economics expert.

But in a (reportedly) 7.5B industry, how much tax income would BC be losing out on? I imagine weed, like cigarettes, would be taxed ridiculously.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by evman150

The first part is just semantics. Why not pare it down to some sort of emergency response task force? Obviously that's valuable to the Canadian public, but it doesn't have to be the military's job.

The military does do the job right now and they do it damn well... plus setting up a national response force, what are they going to do, have 15,000 people waiting around to do something once every couple of years? That really seems like a crap idea.

Originally Posted by evman150

"Ensuring [our] freedom"...no. They don't do that, sorry. Army types like to get all high and mighty, when really the truth is they don't ensure our freedom at all. It's all just bluster. Canadian soldiers killing some Afghans does nothing for me. Absolutely nothing but waste my tax dollars.

Judging by your previous posts, you are generally about giving everyone the same rights and the same privileges no matter who they are and where they are from or what their background may be. Seems like that only extends to the Canadian borders though and the rest of the world can be damned.

Plus I think that history has shown that those who train over in Afghanistan and those who are based out of Afghanistan have and will continue to come over to western nations and attempt to inflict the maximum amount of damage as is possible. The hands off approach really didn't do much to protect our security so maybe a different approach is needed in regions such as Afghanistan.

There is a reason that every developed nation has an armed forces, because they are an unfortunate necessity.

Originally Posted by evman150

"Defending the north"...from penguins? From those pesky reds? This doesn't need to be the military either, just like the emergency thing.

Arctic sovereignty? Has this been a major issue in the news due to the melting polar ice caps and the opening of the Northwest Passage as well as the natural resources which are located underneath? The actions of the Dutch, Norway, the United States as well as the Russians have proven that even if it is only symbolic it is necessary to have troops as well as equipment such as ice breakers up north.

Originally Posted by evman150

As for Afghanistan, it's a joke we ever went there in the first place. That was the colossal blunder.

I disagree, the troops there are doing a fantastic job, but you know my viewpoint and I know yours, and I have the feeling that neither of us will change each others opinion.

[moon]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

And what about Harper? The only thing keeping the Conservatives away from a majority at the moment is Harper himself. The CPC could easily have won a majority in the last election if they had a leader that wasn't part of the Reform party old guard. Much of the country will still view them as a Western-based party with socially conservative values so long as they're headed by former-Reform party members. Peter MacKay might be able to win a majority, but I'd really like to see someone like Danny Williams run for the CPC leadership. Given how much he's fueded with Harper, though, he may have burnt too many bridges to seek the federal party's leadership.

Danny Williams, and even Peter Mackay, seems like a recipe for bringing the Conservatives back to the old center party that led to the rise of the Reform Party in the West.

I can't see either appealing to the strength of the party in Western Canada and that any short term success they would have in Atlantic Canada and Ontario would be shot down by the upset voters in the West which is where the real strength lies.

[Stranger]

Originally Posted by evman150

As for Afghanistan, it's a joke we ever went there in the first place. That was the colossal blunder.

I'm glad there wasn't more of your people in the 30's. If there was, we'd all be speaking German. To you it's a bad idea until there's a terrorist attack in BC, and then you'd complain that the government hasn't done enough. Unreal.

[Savvy27]

Originally Posted by Stranger

I'm glad there wasn't more of your people in the 30's. If there was, we'd all be speaking German. To you it's a bad idea until there's a terrorist attack in BC, and then you'd complain that the government hasn't done enough. Unreal.

Maybe I am misreading you, but could you please explain the similarities between the Taliban/terrorist groups and the Nazi's?

Personally, I'm just glad there weren't more Evman's living in the US in the 60s or we'd all be speaking Vietnamese.

Every military conflict is not equal. Afghanistan is not similar to World War II and I think that if you want to mock somebody about their opinion of a war, you should argue based on the merits of the conflict being discussed instead of bringing up the most necessary war fought in Canadian history.

As for the stuff about the terrorist attack in BC... doesn't that have to happen and people have to complain before they can be accused of doing so? IF there is an attack, and it could have easily been prevented by increasing the military budget (didn't work for the US), maybe there will be people complaining, but I'm sure there will be more people who change their minds and support higher funding.

Anyways, back to the topic. I find myself in the group who are pleasantly surprised by the Conservative minority. I'm in Japan now, so I hope I'll be able to get my absentee ballot in time. It looks like we're headed for another Tory minority, but it should be interesting to see if anyone is able to shake things up. I'm not even sure what the big issues are going to be this time around?

Healthcare? That's a safe bet.
Afghanistan? Not so sure...
Taxes? Again, I doubt that this will be a difference maker. The Conservatives and Liberals both offer tax cuts every time an election rolls around. Even the NDP usually sticks to Corporate tax hikes and stays away from announcing personal ones.

[Stranger]

My point is that war is sometimes a neccessary evil. You can't just allow an ally like the US to be attacked and do nothing to help. Also, if you talk to the Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, they say they are making a difference and progress has been made in the war and the lives of the Afghans is improving. To me that is a positive.
I'm not trying to say that it matches the importance of WW2, but it was a situation that needed to be dealt with. I may be in the minority of Canadians, but I support the war.

As for the election, obviously I will vote PC. They have done a good job despite having a minority. I hope their re-election comes with a majority this time though so something can actually be accomplished this time. Canada needs tough crime laws and the conservatives are the only party willing to take on that issue. Will they get a majority? Probably not, but who knows what damage Dion can do to himself and the Liberals in the next month. We may even see the NDP steal even more of his seats.

[rubecube]

I did a lot of campaining for the Greens during the last election but Elizabeth May has said some pretty boneheaded things over the last few years and I don't know if they'll be getting my vote this year. Considering the rampant socialist paradise I've moved into, I may vote Conservative just to stir things up.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I did a lot of campaining for the Greens during the last election but Elizabeth May has said some pretty boneheaded things over the last few years and I don't know if they'll be getting my vote this year. Considering the rampant socialist paradise I've moved into, I may vote Conservative just to stir things up.

I've protest voted Green in the past, but May is a nut. The NDP just aren't a viable option with Layton in charge. And Dion, yeesh.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by driveway

I'd really rather vote for any party that campaigned on a platform of changing the electoral system from first-past-the-post to proportional-representation.

I know that's unpopular here in middle-child-syndrome Alberta, but any system that's pretty much guaranteed to:

A) prevent majority governments
and
B) allow small fringe parties appropriate representation in parliament

is okay by me.

I absolutely 100% agree. I've come to the sad realization that to effectively do this though you have to re-open the constitution...no party wants to do that as it would be political suicide. It has to be entrenched in the constitution though, otherwise future governments have the opportuinity to change it on a whim, and that just can't happen.

btw, hilarious to address Alberta as "middle child syndrome Alberta". Its so true. People here complain of Western Alienation...but then think that BC and Sask. are full of wackos because they actually elect people from the entire political spectrum!

[Slava]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Yup which is why the Grits should be happy an election has been called. They will never win with Dion - so they need to go through this process so they can move on to someone else ASAP.

They might not win with Dion. But the polls are showing a statistical dead-heat at this point. What do you think of the Liberals holding a minority with the same seat distribution as we have now in reverse? I suppose that is the end of Harper as he can't win either?

I know its unlikely and no I haven't been drinking the kool-aid here, just maing conversation before everyone piles on!!

[Caged Great]

Honestly, I am hoping for either a conservative or liberal minority with the loser getting rid of their current leader. I cannot stand Harper because he's a control freak and I shudder at the thought of him ever getting a majority. Dion is not charismatic either and doesn't really instill a "vote for me" vibe.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by evman150

I`m going to admit right now I`m no economics expert.

But in a (reportedly) 7.5B industry, how much tax income would BC be losing out on? I imagine weed, like cigarettes, would be taxed ridiculously.

If the legally sold pot is taxed ridiculously, why are people buying it?

We already have a thriving cottage industry of people willing to flout the law and risk prison time to sell pot, do you really think they'll become law abiding entrepreneurs who shovel over huge percentages of their profits to the government if what they do is legalized rater than risk fines for a failure to remit taxes?

Will they close up shop just because there are gov't run pot sellers?

Will people who already go to illegal sellers choose to pay riduculously more from gov't approved, tax charging dealers as opposed to their regular illegal dealers who sell significantly cheaper?

Enlighten us as to how this works. . . .

[Azure]

I'm not impressed with the Copyright Law. Part of me would vote against the Conservatives.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm not impressed with the Copyright Law. Part of me would vote against the Conservatives.

Sounds like you don't just want proportional representation--you want proportional voting.

Under that system I'd vote 11% NDP, 52% Liberal and 37% conservative. More or less.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm not impressed with the Copyright Law. Part of me would vote against the Conservatives.

No worries, the law has now died as it should have. Here we go election mode.