Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

BubberMiley

Members
  • Posts

    11,028
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

Everything posted by BubberMiley

  1. Harper's plan doesn't address the lack of daycare spaces available to parents. Because such a large number of women now have careers, the market (particularly the housing market) has adjusted to the two-income-family norm and made it very, very difficult for a family to subsist on one income without living in poverty. This has been a dramatic social change that has been happening gradually since the 70s so that, now, whether or not you agree with the idea of daycare, it's a reality. Many people would love to be able to have one parent stay home with the kids but it has simply become unaffordable for a lot of people. So, because it's impossible to regulate the market and impossible to force women to not work, we are left with two scenarios: improve daycare options or continue with the situation where it is almost impossible for people to have children because of either financial or infrastructure (i.e., no daycare spaces available) constraints. To that, you could say: You can't have kids? That's your problem. Which it is, but it's also everybody's problem for two reasons: one, like bunnies, they're going to have kids anyway; two, if nobody has kids, we're going to have a hell of a time keeping ourselves afloat when we're all retired. So in answer to your question, I'm opposed to Harper's plan because it doesn't address the core need, which is the need for more spaces. In terms of the financial assistance it provides, it helps, but after the taxes have been paid, it's not going to suddenly be affordable to have a parent stay home. The problem that exists will still exist, and the birth rate will continue to decline. And besides, since when are social programs supposed to benefit everyone? They're there to fill a need; if there's no need, there's no need.
  2. Just one more defection like that and the NDP has the balance of power.
  3. I don't think he could come up with enough cabinet posts.
  4. Starting to feel a little naive yet TM:?
  5. Bob Rae had a major recession to deal with. You ignoring the points I made about the Manitoba NDP, which is comprised of many of the same people in the federal NDP. In fact, they all had a big post-election meeting in Winnipeg this week.
  6. Do you mean they should work full time while going to school? With most programs that wouldn't be possible.
  7. I don't think our post-secondary system is overly generous. As it is, it's difficult to get a degree without a $25000 debt unless you have help or a really good part-time job. That's a pretty significant debt considering they're still going to have mortgages and car payments and daycare bills on top of that. If you consider what baby boomers like me had to pay to go to university back in the 70s (a pittance, really), it would be pretty nasty of us, after benefiting greatly from that, to force kids to take on more debt than they already are. Now that I'm making money, I don't mind paying taxes to make sure the system remains reasonably accessible to everyone. A well-educated workforce helps the economy grow, and that too benefits everyone. Besides, social programs should benefit those who need help, not those who don't, and I haven't heard any indication of rampant fraud in the welfare system today.
  8. You're inventing platforms for them. It's easy to argue against a party if you create positions for them with no research into where they actually stand. In the last election they said they wouldn't raise taxes and they would continue with a balanced budget. You could look at NDP governments that actually exist to see what they do when they're in power. Manitoba has had one for nearly 7 years. They haven't raised taxes at all--in fact reduced personal income taxes for the middle class in the last budget--and have run a balanced budget every year. The NDP recognizes that wealth doesn't just appear out of nowhere, and it recognizes that social programs won't last very long if you need to go in debt to pay for them. They also recognize that personal income taxes can't go any higher and they should come down for middle income earners.
  9. Absolutely. Otherwise they would have no reason to strive to create wealth. There is a happy medium in there somewhere--the sweet spot of taxation--where people are richly rewarded for their efforts, potholes get filled, kids get educated, people get health care when they need it, and poor people aren't starving in the streets. I think the problem is not in the social programs themselves--they benefit everyone--but in the bureaucracy. If Harper can tackle that problem without cutting services or raising taxes (and I do believe it can be done), then he'll be the greatest prime minister yet.
  10. I never quite understood why conservatives, who advocate less government control over our lives, are often the first to advocate giving government the power to kill us.
  11. I think Thomas Sophonow and David Milgaard would probably be opposed to capital punishment.
  12. We could start with compassion for potential future victims, and keep them locked up.
  13. Do you think your god is happy seeing you all self-righteous and judgemental? I seem to remember something in that book you pick and choose quotes from about not judging or else you'll be judged. I guess you'll be burning with the homos.
  14. Yes, it helps us tremendously. I don't consider myself taxed to death and I make more money than you. I don't think we need to be taxed higher to create better social programs either. But if you've ever visited South America, you would find that a great number of people live in real poverty. Pure dismal poverty, the likes of which we don't even see on Hastings Street or our Indian reserves. That breeds disease and crazy social problems. The result is the wealthy are all in gated communities with bars on their windows. This environment doesn't encourage investment because nobody wants to live there. Property values decline and it's a slippery slope to rampant poverty. My point is that social programs can provide an element of stability to the society that benefits everyone. That's what helps us. You just haven't thought much about it before you talked I guess.
  15. Since all you're capable of considering is how social programs benefit you personally, have you ever considered how they might benefit you by maintaining a stable social environment that promotes investment in our economy? If you've ever been to a place with real poverty, you would realize that it's not a place you'd want to live.
  16. Would you say social workers have a paid slavery arrangement? With the proportion of private to public schools as it is, you could say teachers are in a paid slavery arrangement too. A public system can be efficient and flexible: I don't think that defies the laws of physics, nor does it involve catching farts. Ah, but if there was good-quality, cheap heroin available at the safe injection site...
  17. I don't think it's possible to report on something and not have a some sort of slant come through. There is no such thing as an unbiased reporter. If you think there is one, they're probably just so in line with your own views, you can't spot the bias.
  18. No, the reference was just very subtle. We have wheelchair weed where I come from too. Maybe that's what prevented me from understanding.
  19. It seems to me if you want the CBC to be privatized, you'd make a better case by explaining why you think the government shouldn't be financing a TV network, not by picking out videos they've shown that you personally dislike. Every organization has a bias of one sort or another: it's impossible to avoid, and the argument that "they showed a video that legitimized kids spraypainting; therefore, they should be privatized" is pretty weak.
  20. I wouldn't say I'm in a position of wealth, and I'm certainly not advocating higher taxes. I'm just defending social programs and think that with better management, they could be even more effective than they are with the existing resources. So I'm as bitter as the next guy when tax money is squandered; I'm just not bitter at the people who need help, because I don't think they're the ones squandering it.
  21. How about public education? Are you against that too?
  22. I think he meant that our health care system is a mix of private and public: your doctor runs his office like a private clinic and then bills the government. If it were truly public, he would be an employee of the government. That's why god invented shooting galleries--er, safe injection sites.
  23. That's true they are often republican (at least the white ones), but hey, they signed up to be in the U.S. Army. I didn't say they were bright. It would be interesting to know how many soldiers in Iraq still think the war is a good idea, but we're not allowed to know that.
  24. I don't know what you're talking about. Clinton wasn't in a wheelchair...and what do wheelchairs have to do with being a chickenhawk? Didn't you ever watch Foghorn Leghorn?
×
×
  • Create New...