Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Rasputin

  • Rank
    Full Member
  1. Look it, this is getting pointless. I challenged you to provide sources, proof and rationale and you provide none. This is not helpful. I don't understand your emotional rejection of what most experts who have spent a lot of time and energy are saying; Canadian govts eat up 43 % of GDP. I have already told you your selective use of OECD data is wrong. You forget; deficits, transfers to gov't controlled groups and indirect revenues captured by gov't crown corps and municipal taxation not captured by the OECD which only acesses prov/federal numbers provide by Stats Can. OECD numbers DO
  2. Hardner - Your comments add zero value. You do not argue with facts or with figures but with little sweeping comments that do nothing to advance debate. Jack Mintz who is of course not as smart as you are, had a series of articles published in the NP [but of course that is part of the vast right wing conspiracy!]. He compared using OECD numbers total Gov't receipts between Australia and Canada. His sources are the OECD.As I said before your original data was wrong. You excluded Gov't receipts and spend from Gov't owned groups. This is clearly incorrect and nonsensical. Mintz makes
  3. Ronda, you stated and i agree with Poverty is the casus belli of demagogues - only about 10 % of money targeted at the poor actually gets there - why ? Every level of gov't strips off their take and then allocates the money for non poor programs. Most of the Cdn entitlement programs are targeted at the middle class not the poor. One of the great fallacies in Canada is the compassionate society. Most tax money is earmarked for decidedly uncompassionate reasons. As well keep in mind that there is NO agreement on how many poor we have. I cited elsewhere on here a study from the US quoting
  4. Hardner you are ridiculous. The Tax grab by Cdn govts IS 43.5 % i have listed numerous sources and even the Dept of Finance numbers confirm that the total take is 43.5 %. OECD numbers do not account for the list i posted nor for deficit spending [ie. in Toronto we run deficits contrary to Municipal law], nor on gov't agency spending - all of which are paid for by taxpayers. Add in indirect revenues from regulatory costs and the total take is over 50 %. You ignore facts, quotes and figures. sce; Take a load off. (tax reduction) : Myers, Jayson using Stas Can and OECD data. Other post
  5. Well BMG, for once i agree with you. The Medicaid bill should be withdrawn and re-voted upon. However keep in mind that the estimates of an extra $150 billion are estimates only, and use a lot of conjecture to come to that number. Having said that, i was against this bill from the beginning. It is just another spend and entitlement program that is highly unnecessary. The only intelligent aspect of the bill are the HSA's but they only start in 2007 i believe. There is a good thread in this section on the Health Care bill. It is a bill designed to steal a little of Hitlery's socialised med
  6. Look it the OECD numbers do not account for any gov't owned group, corp, agency or board that spends tax dollars. This is called public spending. In other words the myriad of crown corps, marketing boards, TVO's, CBC's, RDI's, and so on are not accounted for - these are clearly entities that SPEND TAXPAYER money funded by Presto !! yes tax dollars. So of course they need to be factored into any analysis of what gov't takes from the GDP. The OECD looks only at tax receipts and excludes spending by gov't owned corps and groups. This is ridiculous of course. It also disregards 12 % or o
  7. Hardner you really are a blowhard. Nice selective use of numbers. Tax burden is defined by gov't tax revenues plus spending. In this case Cdn gov'ts collect 43 % of the GDP not the number you quoted. As well according to the Fraser Inst. CD Howe Inst. and others another 12 % is collected in regulatory fees. So in effect Canada has gov'ts controlling 55 % of GDP. In Economic Freedom we are 16th in the World - this was posted on this site as well. Behind such luminaries as Estonia and Ireland. From the CTF for instance: According to your #'s that puts Canada in 7th overall of 23 OEC
  8. The NP says Paul Chretien is running to the left to ward off the charging, snarling, demagogic and all powerful rabble rouser Jack Layton. Give me a break. The NDP has a whopping 15 % of voters according to polls, which should be taken anyway with aspirin and a glass of water. Lots will change between now and a vote. Basically in reading the speech on the web i read a whole lot of typical Liberal platitudes but nothing fundamentally different than what Jean Martin did in the 90s. More money exists for just about everybody and everything - except business, taxpayers and the military. I do
  9. Flea, now you are making some sense this is good. I agree with you that Islam is the total state of being. I was reading a book by Fuller 'Political Islam' - pretty good one - though he is a bit of an apologist for Islam. Fuller states that within Islam there are 'liberals' who want Western styled secularism and separation of powers. Most of these so called radicals are dead or in jail. He states that the Koran like the bible however, is rather inconsistent and you can pull out of the text many lines to support your point of view. He also makes the case that Sharia law is actually not a
  10. Flea your statements are false you said: This is wrong. Resolution 1441 and many resolutions before 1441 clearly stated that Hussein did not comply with UN resolutions and regulations pertaining to the ceasefire. This is diplomatic mumbo jumbo that says - comply or die. There were many reasons - all of them justifiable for the war. What is not justifiable is your immorality in not recognising some obvious facts; 1. Iraq's support of terrorism. 2. Iraq's anti-Israeli pronouncements for jihad and pan Arab expulsion of the Jews. [but in Canada that is okay, they are only Jews !] 3.
  11. What do people think of the throne speech given by happy traveler Mme Clarkson ? It confirms to me that Paul Chretien will not enact any meaningful reform in the coming year at least and most likely beyond. No program reforms, no spending efficiencies, no tax cuts, no military spend, no real deal for cities [especially Toronto]. The Council of Chief Executives states, "the lengthy agenda will drive further rapid and unsustainable growth in Federal spending.' But not on the military of course.
  12. RTR i agree that the war is justified and in fact was 12 years overdue. I don't deny that WMD were central to the argument - but WMD was one of 3 legs of the stool so to speak. Bush made an error by allowing his EU 'Allies' and the UNO to force the conflict over WMD - or at least to use WMD as the driving rationale behind regime change. It would have been much smarter to stay with a tripod approach and use many arguments to underline the threat that Iraq posed to the world. Colin Powell and the State dept. did Bush a disservice by allowing the UNO to armtwist the US over how to 'frame' the
  13. Ned I agree with you on immigration. First as another post outlines immigration is a net benefit - both legal and illegal together - to the US. Second, criminalising people who are doing low wage jobs that US citizens WON'T do is nonsensical. Not to mention as you do, that the gestapo apparatus to deport 8 million people, 4 million of whom are Mexican, would make the Patriot Act look like a Sammy Davis candy man song. On to Kerry and the Dems and can they win ?? Kerry has issues that the Dems need to understand: 1. He is two faced and has a problem with being consistent. Two obvious i
  14. Commie, i don't understand the point of your post. If you had read my post you would have read: 1. Every agency in the world pre war felt that Hussein had WMD and was a threat. 2. WMD might very well still be found - it is far too early to determine as Kay as done, that none will be found. 3. WMD could easily have been shipped to another country or sold or stored or hidden. We don't know - which is why the ISG needs many more months to investigate on the ground in Iraq. 4. WMD has been made the central issue for the UNO - why ? Because though the French and Germans agreed that
  15. Maple, what did you think ? My 2 cents worth? Belinda is the puppet on the strings of John Laschinger, and his rich Bay St. legal eagle friends. John et al. are savvy, experienced, smart, ruthless and 'pragmatic' ie. non - ideological. They must perceive that BS's image [and perhaps b.s.], is necessary to appeal to some voters that are fence straddlers. Well though John and co., are light years smarter than I am, i would kindly disagree with their analysis. Policies, content and substance do matter. 10 years of John Christ was enough - and Martin has given us little fodder to think he
  • Create New...