2011 Canadian Election Thread

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by Slava

The reason that Ignatieff says the budget isn't credible is based on the fact that some of these costs are not quanitifed accurately. The fighter jets is the most major of these costs, and that revelation came about not from the Liberals themselves, but a parliamentary budget officer (if memory serves?).

Arguing politics on CP is basically a waste of time. The Harper apologists take every issue and basically say "Its not a big deal" or "(fill in opposition leader) is not a good alternative".

To me the worst comment though is "sponsorship scandal" or something else from years gone by. It makes it sound as though its OK that Harper and his cronies have committed some transgressions because the other major party screwed up a few years ago. Why voters should accept that as any sort of defence just boggles the mind.

What about the short-term memory "our poop don't stink" liberals? Are they worth having a discussion with?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

actually, those of us who work for a living outside a union environment find spending policies and taxation policies of the NDP and Liberals to be distasteful. that is why they are not an appropriate alternative. I can't afford to live under their government plans.

Well as a small business owner/operator (who works directly with the capital markets) you're not exactly talking to a communist here! Funny thing is that the CPC policies of Harper and the past Liberal regime are not that different from a financial perspectiv though. In fact a lot of the financial praise that the CPC is receiving has nothing to do with them whatsoever.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Taxes are needed but today no party in the Western world dares to raise taxes in fear of not getting voted in.

Is it the people today that are too selfish and can't accept more taxes. I just listen around my office and people think taxes should be LOWER!

Taxes will always be high here due to our minuscule population in such a big country.

In Hong Kong they top tax bracket is at 17%. Population of 8million in 3/4 the size of Calgary.

• Nil to HKD40,000 - 2%
• HKD40,000 to HKD80,000 – 7%
• HKD80,000 to HKD120,000 – 12%
• HKD120,000 upwards – 17%

and they do not have capital gains tax or a sales tax either.

Also I'm flying back later on this year to pick up my $6000 which the HK govt is giving to anyone with a Hk citizenship card. hehe

[Slava]

Originally Posted by SeoulFire

What about the short-term memory "our poop don't stink" liberals? Are they worth having a discussion with?

Well thats the glory of politics and political discussion. Everyone (myself included) brings up the short-comings of the other parties no matter how far back they go, while conveniently overlooking the same transgressions for their own party!

[SeoulFire]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well thats the glory of politics and political discussion. Everyone (myself included) brings up the short-comings of the other parties no matter how far back they go, while conveniently overlooking the same transgressions for their own party!

True enough. I don't think any message board discussion has ever changed the mind of anybody anywhere - especially about politics.

I suppose I am quite jaded with the system - I just don't see any alternative as being good for the region. We are one helluva cash cow but that is about it (representation by contribution?).

I don't see any meaningful reform in the federal system and think that the only the west will look after the west. While not active, I would not be adverse to Western autonomy.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

The reason that Ignatieff says the budget isn't credible is based on the fact that some of these costs are not quanitifed accurately. 1) The fighter jets is the most major of these costs, and that revelation came about not from the Liberals themselves, but a parliamentary budget officer (if memory serves?).

2. Arguing politics on CP is basically a waste of time. The Harper apologists take every issue and basically say "Its not a big deal" or "(fill in opposition leader) is not a good alternative".

3) To me the worst comment though is "sponsorship scandal" or something else from years gone by. It makes it sound as though its OK that Harper and his cronies have committed some transgressions because the other major party screwed up a few years ago. Why voters should accept that as any sort of defence just boggles the mind.

Except that there are real problems with how the budgetary officer arrived at his cost estimates. He added an extra decade to the costs, and he based his cost estimates on what the British were buying which were the STOLV and carrier based versions and not the A variety that Canada is buying.

There are also some questions on the legitimacy of the estimated costs of the tough on crime bill as an independant professor came out and stated that the costs would be lower (It was an article in the sun a few days ago)

It can also be argued that the Parlimentary officer estimation on the jets didn't include direct economic benefits or the partnership purchase benefits.

I would fully expect that Ignatieff probably won't debate too hard on the jets.

2. Please show me how Ignatieff or Layton would be a good alternative. And your second paragraph could be reversed that its useless arguing with a Liberal supporter because all they can really bring up is some nebulous unproven Darth Sideous style hidden agenda. Or that Ignatieff would make a better prime minister because Stephen Harper is a mean vindictive man.

3) No its not ok, the Bev Oda thing to me was oderous, The in and out scandal really doesn't bug me because its a practice that all parties do practice. But the sponsership scandal does stand out because in a lot of ways it was to me a lot more oderous then what we've seen in a long time.

My problem as a voter is that Stephen Harper stinks less then Ignatieff and has a higher sense of reality then the world that Jack Layton and the NDP float in.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Except that there are real problems with how the budgetary officer arrived at his cost estimates. He added an extra decade to the costs, and he based his cost estimates on what the British were buying which were the STOLV and carrier based versions and not the A variety that Canada is buying.

There are also some questions on the legitimacy of the estimated costs of the tough on crime bill as an independant professor came out and stated that the costs would be lower (It was an article in the sun a few days ago)

It can also be argued that the Parlimentary officer estimation on the jets didn't include direct economic benefits or the partnership purchase benefits.

I would fully expect that Ignatieff probably won't debate too hard on the jets.

2. Please show me how Ignatieff or Layton would be a good alternative. And your second paragraph could be reversed that its useless arguing with a Liberal supporter because all they can really bring up is some nebulous unproven Darth Sideous style hidden agenda. Or that Ignatieff would make a better prime minister because Stephen Harper is a mean vindictive man.

3) No its not ok, the Bev Oda thing to me was oderous, The in and out scandal really doesn't bug me because its a practice that all parties do practice. But the sponsership scandal does stand out because in a lot of ways it was to me a lot more oderous then what we've seen in a long time.

My problem as a voter is that Stephen Harper stinks less then Ignatieff and has a higher sense of reality then the world that Jack Layton and the NDP float in.

Well then get Harper out and put in a good candidate. I hate this minority crap.

Too bad Chretien is too old. He would be awesome in a comeback. Best prime minister ever!

[CaptainCrunch]

Chretien was a mean spirited vindictive corrupt piece of garbage. The only thing that I applauded him for was ensuring his own parties destruction when he left office to screw over Paul Martin.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

Well then get Harper out and put in a good candidate. I hate this minority crap.

Too bad Chretien is too old. He would be awesome in a comeback. Best prime minister ever!

Chretian lines up right next to Trudeau when it comes to screwing Alberta.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

Chretian lines up right next to Trudeau when it comes to screwing Alberta.

How did Chretien screw Alberta? Trudeau totally screwed Alberta. Did Chretien screw over AB because he had 2 liberal majoritys?

Canada was never better under his rule. Plus the Shawinigan handshake? and the "i like a little pepper on my steak" comment after the pepper spray incident. This man is da man.

[burn_this_city]

Only thing Chretien did that I applauded was choked that protestor.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Only thing Chretien did that I applauded was choked that protestor.

They made it into a f-ing tshirt. What could Harper do to make a tshirt?

http://evokativ.ca/s1_handshake.htm

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

They made it into a f-ing tshirt. What could Harper do to make a tshirt?

http://evokativ.ca/s1_handshake.htm

Have his secret police dissapear your whole family while singing beatles songs?

[The Goon]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

They made it into a f-ing tshirt. What could Harper do to make a tshirt?

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Have his secret police dissapear your whole family while singing beatles songs?

No but it appears they have gotten to you.

[CaptainCrunch]

pfft, how do you know that I'm not a member of the secret police here to monitor subversives.

Please stay seated with your hands on the keyboard, somebody will be there momentarily to assist you in your relocation.

[ken0042]

^^ He'll do it too. Look what happened to the 41 previous Kens on CP!

[CaptainCrunch]

[WilsonFourTwo]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Is it the people today that are too selfish and can't accept more taxes. I just listen around my office and people think taxes should be LOWER!

30 years of hearing that "Tax cuts create broad wealth" had (imo) brainwashed an entire generation - myself included.

It doesn't appear to have turned out this way. I think about tax cuts every time the news story is about the (rapidly) increasing earnings gap between the (uber) rich and the rest of us. Interesting to see that between these changes and the results of deregulation, we may actually have a generation do worse than the previous one.

[WilsonFourTwo]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Only thing Chretien did that I applauded was choked that protestor.

Canada staying the frakk out of Iraq.

I sincerely appreciated that. It took balls and was the right choice.