Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

cgarrett

Members
  • Content Count

    164
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cgarrett

  1. just thought that it was amusing that the conservative "oil patch" party of canada website ensures that the term "global warming" is never used. this is a great thread and breakdown with pie chart of the conservatives "environment" plan... http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2496 essentially, the target is to get to 1998 levels by 2020 provided that we only have 1-2% growth.
  2. so the conservative and liberal agendas for the environment are a wash? well, do the cons _have_ a plan? remember steve saying that he "wasn't convinced global warming was even happening"? what about the ndp agenda? aren't they at least addressing the right issue of promoting the 'shift' that needs to happen? by promoting capacity in alternative methods of transportation. the biggest problem seems to be waste. pretty well 100% of pleasure vehicles on the road today are completely over powered for transportation needs. how much could we reduce our carbon footprint by regulating these vehicles
  3. thanks for the info from the con website. i see some omissions here that need to be explained though.. self-employed but also non-incorporated? thats key and i see no mention of it. self-employed as in sole proprietor or partner etc... well, thats the same thing as being a t4 income earner. I don’t see any reason to have them not opt in and get benefits but… well, again, its not fair that they get to opt out again to those who have no choice. now being self-employed myself where my income is discretionary on my part from an incorporation that I own… well, if they allow people like me to opt
  4. lets call a spade a spade here shall we? tax t4 employee's... give to business people. its the conservative agenda! t4'd employee's should be outraged!
  5. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2...vatives-ei.html please let me know if i understand this correctly.... as a self employed individual, i get to opt out of ei premiums. but I think I’m going to need maternity leave so I opt in? and then i can opt out again? sign me up!! ha ha ha!! so the t4’d slaves are grossly overpaying into ei which has a huge surplus now and for which they have no option not to pay so the thing to do is… give the money to self employed people? sign me up! ha ha ha ha! it will pay for itself? oh, that’s wishful thinking! what kinda program where you can opt in
  6. just curious what others think about the timing of the election being influenced by the upcoming u.s. elections? irrespective of whether any associations between the canadian conservatives and u.s. republican parties in the minds of canadians are justified... has the fact that it is highly likely that the democrats will come to presidential power in november a motivation for calling an election here in canada in october? in other words, could the outcome of the canadian election be much different if it was held november 5? my suspicion is that the selected date for the canadian election has
  7. ”Its an interesting subject to start I will throw in a few definitions. Liberal and Conservative” “The philosophy that a Nations wealth is the property of its people to enjoy is a founding principle of marxism. In a democracy Wealth is held by its citizens for there private use which the government takes a portion of through taxes in order to found the business of running a government.” as soon as I see these labels which are, currently, predominately informed by a select group of people (ie. liberal, conservative, marxist, red tape) then it worries me. a ‘democracy’ has nothing to do with
  8. the same military-industrial complex is in full charge of both countries foreign affairs. thus the recent escalation to improve sales.
  9. ok, well i challenge 'conservatives' to pick examples from this article and make reasonable arguments regarding their assertions that parts of the article are incorrect. shouldn't be difficult if its all 'garbage'. of course, one of the assertions is that neo-con ideology does not hold up to detailed inspection and so conservative finger puppets have been indoctrinated in the use of anything but meaningful dialogue that provides more than one view of any particular discourse. and no, 'shut up' by certain fox news personalities can not be described as 'meaningful dialogue'. in fact, august
  10. preston manning? don cherry? they said 'intellectual'! david suzuki is recognized _world_wide_ as a great thinker.
  11. i have been asking myself this question for some time. why do 'conservatives' who are not part of the aristocracy (ie. rich and/or powerful) follow without reasoning on their own behalf? this is a great article that explains 'conservatism' in detail. http://www.bcpolitics.ca/left_conservatism.htm what i am beginning to grasp is that these people are of the type that like to follow ideologies and 'conservatism' is attractive to them because they feel that they are also 'better than most people' or imagine themselves as members of the ruling class. this article answers so many questions, if
  12. yeah, that neo-con free market stuff makes lots of sense... but thank god we don't follow it precisely. north america is rich because of unionization. it is becoming poor without it. if you look at statistics showing average family income this value increases dramatically as north america enters a period of heavy unionization 50 years ago. as it crumbles then we see this value dropping like a rock and so too the economy as lack of spending follows. all powerful economies demand that the people in that economy have money to spend! what the hell is so difficult to understand about this? capi
  13. if bin laden is caught... then the us wins the war on terror! oh, except that that is not exactly the idea in the first place... they would have to make up a new war wouldn't they? to make some excuse for the protection or expansion of u.s. 'interests'. like the 'cold war' or the 'war on drugs' or some other forever war... the new american empire is like all of the other empires before. history is cyclical with new players. just look at the history of rome or england for a look into the future. these powerful empires expand beyond their borders in ever increasing circles of manipulation
  14. i've been away from this forum for awhile... i can only suggest not responding to any more posts from this guy. he must be living upside down with all the crap that comes out of his mouth constantly. iraq is not a quagmire. everyone with any intelligence (including the white house) knows (and knew) the amount of time and money involved. its just that they didn't really properly inform the american people about what it was going to take and who was going to pay for it. they also failed to let them know that it was strickly about oil. rich republican supporters don't have boys on the ground t
  15. back to the original post... hilarious!!! thanks for the post, ironside! the cost of the iraq war to the american people is, of course, ridiculous. isn't iraq the second most rich oil country in the middle east? shouldn't iraqis be paying for this? well, of course these questions are rhetorical. us and uk oil firms i suspect are firmly planted and moving oil far before any bread trucks arrive and using that oil to pay for the rebuilding would cut into their extreme profits. this is a good study on the subject of iraq oil and war: http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2...aniesiniraq.h
  16. http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles...me_taxation.htm i suspect that the bulk of political contributions also come from the top 1%.
  17. not on the same level.... but 'butchers' all the same. whether its the last hundred or thousand years is unimportant. america is now in the same position (from a military and financial position) as egypt, rome, england and a host of historical super powers. power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. americans, as with anyone else, should never _accept_ anything but the best from their own country. don't make apologies for the evil!
  18. oh, and i'd like to weigh in on the taxation is stealing thing. do you like the fact that turning on a light switch creates light? or that turning on the faucet gives you water? or that there's a road outside that goes somewhere? or that you can call somebody on the telephone? or that you don't have to worry about someone coming over and kicking your head in and taking all of your stuff? sure, some of the 'operations' of these things can be privatized (provided that we get to look at the books)... but you own it. its yours! why is it that a company that sells you something at a 'market
  19. yeah, i find that the rhetoric regarding the power of 'competition' in the market place pronounced everywhere in this forum without any idea of how little 'competition' really exists! ever wonder why, say, portable cd players have been the same price for a decade? suppliers making continual costly advances? ha! or how about the price of gas going up at every gas station at the same time? the term 'gas price war' left with the last independent gas chain! i could go on forever here... a first year university economics class is all one needs to know... suppliers of goods and services contin
  20. all you people must be much younger then i am... you don't remember bush senior. in comparison, bush junior is the same game different reason. what ever happened to the 'war on drugs'? did we win that one? 'stay the course' i remember bush senior saying. whatever happened to that perpetual war that conveniently justified the invasions of greneda, panama and the continued support of violent tyrants in latin america. al queda!? they're all gone... but 'possible links to al queda' events will continue... but only until the next administration.
  21. paul wolfowitz as head of the world bank?! these guys are crooks, not conservatives! its a small group of the most powerful people in the world... and not all american! they're behind a huge shove to control remaining fossil fuel supplies... at american taxpayers expense. hilarious! i wouldn't be at all surprised if history showed that these guys perpetrated 911 because they are the only ones coming out on top because of it. you only have to be into oil or arms to love these guys!
  22. and 'google searches' constitute factual research? i wish i knew this when i was at school... about a year ago i saw the dean of the harvard medical school indicating that research into the addictiveness of marijuana indicated that it was about as addictive as coffee. reason enough to be concerned, i guess! of course, i have not been able to find the quote on a 'google search' so it may not be true... of course, as you have pointed out, i am from b.c.! and marijuana growing is our biggest cash crop!
  23. point taken willy. sorry for my 'idealistic' view. the liberals have a tough road ahead of them if they want to implement this. any government in canada would. its unfortunate that our selected leaders have a tough time implementing platforms that they were elected on and surviving. maybe bill o'reilly would say something like 'if you elected a politician who said he was going to do something then let him do it and _shut_up_'!
  24. you have not disputed that global warming caused by mankind and its possible disastrous effects are possible. only those who do not believe it is possible could support a 'pragmatic' path. if one does believe that global warming and its effects are _possible_, then mankind has been anything _but_ 'pragmatic' until now. now is the time for pragmatic behavior! we as a nation may decide that we are going to reduce co2 emissions no matter the cost of thousands of jobs. why is it that the 'global warming is not happening' camp simply say that the loss of jobs is forever? that we cannot build new
  25. august and others have made some good points here... and i am the first to admit not knowing much about 'the charter'. i think that the most important thing for gay people is the appreciation of their union regarding things like inheritance and work benefits etc... if some of the ideas expressed here provide for these things and still retain the traditional definition of marriage then i think that is reasonable.
×
×
  • Create New...