Election!

[Calgary Flames]

Voting is for suckers... Didn't this country do this like a year ago?? Pathetic.

*waits for "You're pathetic for not voting" nonsense*

Yawn

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Calgary Flames

Voting is for suckers... Didn't this country do this like a year ago?? Pathetic.

You're a fat lazy slob who is sheltered because he doesn't do anything but hang out at his parents house.

Voting is important, you're an idiot if you think it's pathetic. And you wonder why no one in real life, or on this messageboard likes you.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by FireFly

How slick is Harper? Cutting the GST to 5% in 5 years. Down to 6% immediately. NICE!

What's really slick about Harper is that no tie look he is been sporting in the last couple of days, classy.

The getting the GST down to 5% doesn't impress me at all to be honest. 7% is fine, it's not like I'm killing myself with the extra 2% sales tax.

[MarchHare]

To prove that I'm not a total partisan, I will give credit to Harper on the GST cut (but I'm still not going to vote for him). While the Liberals plan to cut income taxes, the Conservative promose to reduce the GST should see low-income Canadians keep more of their money (I haven't plugged any numbers into a spreadsheet or anything, so I may be wrong here). Sales taxes, by their nature, are very regressive, whereas income taxes are more progressive.

I do find it interesting that the Conservatives are proposing a tax cut that will see the poor benefit more while the Liberals' plan seems to be a bigger benefit to the rich and middle class. That's the exact opposite of how the major parties in the US proposed their tax strategies. Does anyone remember a few months ago when Bush proposed eliminating income tax altogether and replacing it with a fairly hefty national sales tax? The reason he did so is because it would see the tax burden of the rich decrease while the poor would pay a larger share than they do now. Quite odd that the CPC would propose such a populist measure. Good for them.

[transplant99]

Yeah...though the actual amount means little to the average Canadian, the proposal will stick with them. (2% sales tax? not a lot until added up or making a major purchase, though i hated the thing from day 1 as it was nothing more than a tax grab from a power hungry Mulroney)

Harper one-upped Martin on this one. I read somewhere that psychologically it was a stroke of genius, in keeping the Cons in voters minds in a meaningful way.

However, its still very early and I suspect we will see many more of these kinds of things as time marches on.

[ernie]

the advantage of using the GST to save people the same amount of money is as I mentioned before. It's an annoyance people see each and every day.

And as you mention T99 when someone builds a house or pruchases a car they would really really notice it. It's a smart ploy by harper and it's getting some good play out here in the Maritimes. In fact there were a few stories in the paper of late that very much indicate the Liberals are going to have to actually campaign on something other than the "hidden agenda". People are waking up to the fact that the agenda was never hidden but simply different from the Liberals. And that's what an election should be about. If you don't agree with a party on gay marriage fine but let's see where my ideologies stand on health care, education etc etc by actually having the parties out promoting their ideas. Despite the stumbles the harper has had he is not viewed with fear out here as he was previously. As much as the cowboy outfit was embarassing his hitting the BBQ circuit and talking to ordinary people one on one has made a difference. Whether it translates into votes we don't know.

[Ace]

Originally Posted by FireFly

How slick is Harper? Cutting the GST to 5% in 5 years. Down to 6% immediately. NICE!

I'm heavly in favour of Harper (so let me state that right away):

Man is he on a roll though:
-Puts marriage on the table first day (gets hidden agenda card eliminated)
-Hits the GST angle - an obvious vote swing in past elections
-Comes in strong on health care - the thing that scared voters from him last time.

What is Martin doing? - Seems to respond second to all the issues.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Ace

-Puts marriage on the table first day (gets hidden agenda card eliminated)
.

That was a good move?

[Ace]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

That was a good move?

Yes, from today's herald:

In one fell sweep, Nimijean says, Harper blunted charges the party harbours a hidden agenda, lived up to the party’s policy opposing gay marriage, and, at the same time, went some way to burying it as an election issue.

and...

Nimijeans says there’s little downside to Harper’s strategy.
He low-balls the issue. But he also reminds voters where the party stands on a subject that spawned deep divisions within the Liberal party, and within the country.
Indeed, more than two dozen Liberal MPs voted against the Martin government’s legislation legalizing same-sex marriage. The legislation, opposed by almost all Conservative MPs, was approved and became law last June.
It hasn’t gone unnoticed that the Liberal war room, never shy about jumping into action, has been surprisingly silent about Harper’s comments.
Martin offered only a veiled criticism, saying no prime minister should use the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to strip individuals of their rights.
In the background, his advisers reminded reporters that, according to most constitutional experts, Harper could not change the definition of marriage without invoking the charter’s notwithstanding clause —a position Harper does not buy.
Still, the Liberals are not in a great position to go after the Conservatives.
“The more they beat up on us on this,” said one Tory, “the more they are saying, basically, if you don’t agree with samesex marriage, you shouldn’t vote Liberal.”

He basically gave the Liberals a chance to jump on him day one, and they refused. Now on day 20 they can't claim that the conservatives have this hidden agenda, they have already said their position. It would have come up regardless of who said it first. They look much better to state it themselves. Everyone already knows the conservative position, if you are for the re-definition you're already not voting conservative. If your against it, might as well be reminded of the Liberals position.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

OK a quick GST rant
Why hold the Liberals accountable for not eliminating the GST, when it was the tories that introduced it in the first place? I understand that Jean broke a promise...but geez he is long gone...sort of

Furthermore it only adds up to ~$600 per year at most, which is not chump change...but still minor IMO compared to other issues. I prefer to listen to the economic experts who generally suggest that there are better tax modifications to be made rather than a politician who is undoubtably opportunistic by nature.

On the whole corrupt Liberal agenda....I still haven't heard anything that Paul Martin can directly be held accountible for that is bad. He was not responsible for the sponsorship scandal...has HE done anything that has been scandelous (other than dithering)?
________
WASHINGTON MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARY

[Ace]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

OK a quick GST rant
Why hold the Liberals accountable for not eliminating the GST, when it was the tories that introduced it in the first place? I understand that Jean broke a promise...but geez he is long gone...sort of

The Progressive conservatives have already been held responsible, being diminished to 2 seats, and susequently having to merge with the Canadian alliance. The Liberals have yet to pay for their lie.

On the whole corrupt Liberal agenda....I still haven't heard anything that Paul Martin can directly be held accountible for that is bad. He was not responsible for the sponsorship scandal...has HE done anything that has been scandelous (other than dithering)?

It runs deep into the Liberal party, the party took our money to help themselves get re-elected. It doesn't matter who they pin it on.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

OK a quick GST rant
Why hold the Liberals accountable for not eliminating the GST, when it was the tories that introduced it in the first place? I understand that Jean broke a promise...but geez he is long gone...sort of

Furthermore it only adds up to ~$600 per year at most, which is not chump change...but still minor IMO compared to other issues. I prefer to listen to the economic experts who generally suggest that there are better tax modifications to be made rather than a politician who is undoubtably opportunistic by nature.

On the whole corrupt Liberal agenda....I still haven't heard anything that Paul Martin can directly be held accountible for that is bad. He was not responsible for the sponsorship scandal...has HE done anything that has been scandelous (other than dithering)?

As for a % of your earning, yes. About $600/year. But if you make a large purchase, like a house, and you buy it for $150,000, that 2% is $3000 in mortgage. Not to mention the interest on that $3000.

Just as an example.

The other nice thing is that GST is something that affects all of us. Unlike the Liberals who want to reduce taxes on the middle class only, this affects us all.

Why hold the liberals responsible? They were voting in for saying they would remove it. And like a lot of other election promises they made, they lied.

[MarchHare]

Why hold the liberals responsible? They were voting in for saying they would remove it.

Well, the primary Liberal campaign promise in 1993 was "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs", and with unemployment at a 30-year low, they did deliver that (inasmuch as you can credit any government for fostering a strong economy). Eliminating the GST was one of several other campaign promises, though, and that one they did not fulfill. But does anyone really expect ANY party to follow through on 100% of their campaign pledges?

[Ace]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Well, the primary Liberal campaign promise in 1993 was "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs", and with unemployment at a 30-year low, they did deliver that (inasmuch as you can credit any government for fostering a strong economy). Eliminating the GST was one of several other campaign promises, though, and that one they did not fulfill. But does anyone really expect ANY party to follow through on 100% of their campaign pledges?

I'm old enough to remember that election, and that was a MAJOR election issue. The GST basically caused the Progressive Conservatives to be eliminated from the political scene, to the point that people we're debating if they could still be concidered a major party. The Liberals rode the coat tails of GST anger, and then 5 years later there was no real threat to the Liberals as the "right" was fighting itself.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Here's a thought...if Steven was PM we probably would have had 'boots on the ground' in Iraq. Do you think that would have been a good idea?
________
LIVE SEX WEBSHOWS

[Ace]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

Here's a thought...if Steven was PM we probably would have had 'boots on the ground' in Iraq. Do you think that would have been a good idea?

Actually the big difference probably would have been that we would have come out and been more supportive of the american's politically (which is all they were asking for), but would not have had a very active role. This is largly due to our under funded military.

I would have agreed with the support of the US politically because the Liberals were able to make all the big cuts to our military budget on the fact that if anything happenes to us the Americans would have our back.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Ace

Actually the big difference probably would have been that we would have come out and been more supportive of the american's politically (which is all they were asking for), but would not have had a very active role. This is largly due to our under funded military.

I would have agreed with the support of the US politically because the Liberals were able to make all the big cuts to our military budget on the fact that if anything happenes to us the Americans would have our back.

Well they did think the war was a bad idea so supporting it probably wasn't really an option. Saying "we support the war but we aren't sending any troops" wouldn't have helped anyway.

I don't see any reason to give George and his pals any legitimacy for their adventure, and that's all they were after.

Also, there is no reason to apologize for being right in the first place.

[Ace]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't see any reason to give George and his pals any legitimacy for their adventure, and that's all they were after.

In 2005 I see where this sentament is coming from, but how fast people forget how we all felt Sept 11, 2001, the US went after those that they felt attacked them (or funded the attack). It's easy to say they should have done nothing, but honestly a country like the US can't sit back and do nothing when people attack New york. Years went by and the feelings faded, and now people critisize the US in Iraq. Saddam Hussain is a monster that tortures his own people, Iraq will govern themselves again and they'll be much better off.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

Here's a thought...if Steven was PM we probably would have had 'boots on the ground' in Iraq. Do you think that would have been a good idea?

Yes it would have been a good idea and it is/was embarrassing that there are not toops there now and wasn't any troops from the beginning. We should have supported the US not only because it was the right thing to do going into Iraq, but also because they are our number one Ally as well.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Ace

In 2005 I see where this sentament is coming from, but how fast people forget how we all felt Sept 11, 2001, the US went after those that they felt attacked them (or funded the attack). It's easy to say they should have done nothing, but honestly a country like the US can't sit back and do nothing when people attack New york. Years went by and the feelings faded, and now people critisize the US in Iraq. Saddam Hussain is a monster that tortures his own people, Iraq will govern themselves again and they'll be much better off.

Yes it is 2005 and we can see that it was a mistake. I don't think "they should have done nothing", I just think they should have done something else. They didn't go to war because they thought Iraq was behind the terrorist attacks.

The Liberals keeping Canada out of that war was a good thing. I'd be very surprised if the Conservatives even mention Iraq.