-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
For the Canadians: Stockwell Day got Milk
- Thread starter NicColt
- Start date
dennilfloss
Past Lifer 1957-2014 In Memoriam
In Canada, disliked politicians get chocolate milk or cream pie. In many other places they get a bullet. I think that our way of disagreeing with someone is better. Still, the milk thrower will probably get charged with assault and disturbing the peace.
Hit Me With Your best Shot (Pat Benatar)
Hit Me With Your best Shot (Pat Benatar)
one of the other spectators at the event punched the milk thrower
hehe
i didnt catch what his cause was. Milk is kinda lame though, i like the pie in the face better.
and other htan the FL(Q) crises with guy laporte i dont think any canadian politician has been assinated?
Edit
Hahah that was a typo on the FLK thing, however a militant seperatist group from kamploops made me chuckle 🙂
hehe
i didnt catch what his cause was. Milk is kinda lame though, i like the pie in the face better.
and other htan the FL(Q) crises with guy laporte i dont think any canadian politician has been assinated?
Edit
Hahah that was a typo on the FLK thing, however a militant seperatist group from kamploops made me chuckle 🙂
The problem with throwing milk, pies, etc. at politicians is that it often creates sympathy for the person, and makes the "protestor" look like a small-time criminal. Much better to hoist signs and ask the questions they don't want to be asked.
On the other hand, hitting someone with a pie is very funny and is a time-honoured tradition.
BTW, THELIAR, I'm pretty sure that was the FLQ crisis. Stands for "Front de Libération du Québec", not "Front de Libération du Kamloops".
Craig
On the other hand, hitting someone with a pie is very funny and is a time-honoured tradition.
BTW, THELIAR, I'm pretty sure that was the FLQ crisis. Stands for "Front de Libération du Québec", not "Front de Libération du Kamloops".
Craig
GL the guy is promising that I will pay %17 tax instead of the %42 I pay now. The liberals continue to punish it's own people with the most overtaxed in north america in the best economic times this country has seen. The conservatives did this and are history, now the liberals are doing it and will soon follow suit.
If the Americans were to ever pay the same tax levels that we pay, and specially on fuel, there would be civil war but we canadians just bend over and accept it. In the 1999 fiscal year, Federal, provincial, municipal, gst, pst I paid %50 of my entire income in taxes. If there is one thing that I truly hate about Canada this is it.
NicColt,
Goodness...are Canadian voters that dumb that they don't understand what a tax cut as big as the one the Canadian Alliance promises, will do? 1) no universal health care 2) no more low cost of post secondary education 3) no more free highways 4) there will be no way to pay down the deficit 5) there will be no social safety net like welfare, CPP, etc....
Please tell me you're a little more intelligent than the average voter.
My prediction is that the Alliance won't get into government. However, in the slim chance they do, they will look at the books, blame the Liberals for over-spending and say they cannot do the tax cut to 17%. They will promise some sort of tax cut, but in doing so, they will have to drastically cut out some of the programs I mentioned above.
Don't fall into the trap. Ontario is going down the hell hole because Mike Harris is desperately trying to meet his promised tax cut and give everybody an extra $200 back from taxes.
I'm not saying our taxes our high. But for goodness sake, look at what we get in return for our taxes. The U.S. is only second to Canada as having the highest tax rate amongst G7 countries (this from www.canadianalliance.ca even!). What do Americans get? Not much...they have no universal health care, the cost of post secondary education is damned ridiculous, they have toll highways wherever possible, their deficit is still ballooning.
Please think before you vote. The Canadian Alliance is all about marketing....need I mention they're the Reform party with a different name and a new face behind the party.
I know western provinces feel isolated, but if the CA gets into power they promise to do away with provincial transfer payments. I wouldn't be surprised if Ontarians account for a lot of the tax money that goes out west...there's no way a province like Saskatchewan would be able to keep up its level of services and not receive transfer payments. And provinces like Alberta that rely heavily on the oil industry...well if/when that goes bust who will be out there to help bail the province out? The provinces are in Canada to share the wealth...not keep it for themselves.
-GL
Goodness...are Canadian voters that dumb that they don't understand what a tax cut as big as the one the Canadian Alliance promises, will do? 1) no universal health care 2) no more low cost of post secondary education 3) no more free highways 4) there will be no way to pay down the deficit 5) there will be no social safety net like welfare, CPP, etc....
Please tell me you're a little more intelligent than the average voter.
My prediction is that the Alliance won't get into government. However, in the slim chance they do, they will look at the books, blame the Liberals for over-spending and say they cannot do the tax cut to 17%. They will promise some sort of tax cut, but in doing so, they will have to drastically cut out some of the programs I mentioned above.
Don't fall into the trap. Ontario is going down the hell hole because Mike Harris is desperately trying to meet his promised tax cut and give everybody an extra $200 back from taxes.
I'm not saying our taxes our high. But for goodness sake, look at what we get in return for our taxes. The U.S. is only second to Canada as having the highest tax rate amongst G7 countries (this from www.canadianalliance.ca even!). What do Americans get? Not much...they have no universal health care, the cost of post secondary education is damned ridiculous, they have toll highways wherever possible, their deficit is still ballooning.
Please think before you vote. The Canadian Alliance is all about marketing....need I mention they're the Reform party with a different name and a new face behind the party.
I know western provinces feel isolated, but if the CA gets into power they promise to do away with provincial transfer payments. I wouldn't be surprised if Ontarians account for a lot of the tax money that goes out west...there's no way a province like Saskatchewan would be able to keep up its level of services and not receive transfer payments. And provinces like Alberta that rely heavily on the oil industry...well if/when that goes bust who will be out there to help bail the province out? The provinces are in Canada to share the wealth...not keep it for themselves.
-GL
I understand all that GL and you do make good points, but come voting time people won't see any of this. People will see two things, 1) political marketing (or BS) and 2) The overtaxed punishment that the liberals has crushed us with. Martin once said "come hell or high water" well people are going throuh hell and the water is high and that's all they see and if you promise them relief they will go for it. This is exactly how the liberals beat the conservatives and sent them packing and this is how the Alliance will send the liberals packing. People will choose money over substance anytime. Do you remember the phrase "I will abolish the GST" well "I promise you a %17 tax rate" is no different. It doesn't have to make sense you just have to get elected.
I'm saying they won't. It's a matter of timing. All the major provinces have had governments who have promised tax cuts, and what people saw was crappy services in return. In Ontario alone, let me tell you what has happened since Mike got into power:
1) Every single year since he was brought into power, there has been educational strife, at the primary, secondary and even post-secondary levels.
2) The environment in Ontario is the worst in North America now. That's an about face from the early 90s when environmental legislation meant Ontario was far better than its neighbours to the south.
3) Our damn water supply might not even be safe. Poor Walkerton.....and Harris didn't give two sh*ts.
4) You can't get an emergency bed, but hell, you can get a really long ride in an ambulance while you wait to die!
5) A toll highway cropped up...after Ontarians paid for the damn thing. Mike wanted to privatize it because that made sense. So now we're paying to drive on a road that we paid to build!
6) Harris has allowed private universities...after the University of Phoenix hired two full-time lobbyists to play golf with him. Need I mention that the University of Phoenix doesn't have the best track record and has repeatedly been criticized by colleges in the States.
And all this and more...for a lousy tax break that nobody seems to feel.
My prediction for the election is that all the provinces from Ontario east to Newfoundland will be the Liberal stronghold with some inroads by the Bloc, and the PCs. Alberta and all the provinces east of it up to Ontario, will be won by the Canadian Alliance with some inroads by the Liberals. And I'll bet that British Columbia votes Liberal with some inroads by all the parties. The Liberals are going to win no matter what.
I'm not really for any government, but I'll be voting Liberal. Primarily because the MP for my area has called my house (and not just at election time) to see how everything is going and asking for opinions. But also because they're not extreme. The CA is extreme and they've hired some great marketers to try to appeal to everyone.
It ain't gonna work. Your average Canadian Joe Blow, say earns $35,000. He will save $500 on taxes under the CA plan. When he weighs this, against the possibility of having to pay for health care and education for his kids, he'll gladly pay up the $500.
In general, I think us Canadian voters have been screwed so many times by promised tax cuts that we should know better by now..of course I can say "na na na boo boo, I told ya so"...I have never voted (or wanted to vote when I was younger) for a government that has promised drastic tax cuts. No government can meet the sort of things the Canadian Alliance talks about in its platform. It just won't hold up under scrutiny!
-GL
1) Every single year since he was brought into power, there has been educational strife, at the primary, secondary and even post-secondary levels.
2) The environment in Ontario is the worst in North America now. That's an about face from the early 90s when environmental legislation meant Ontario was far better than its neighbours to the south.
3) Our damn water supply might not even be safe. Poor Walkerton.....and Harris didn't give two sh*ts.
4) You can't get an emergency bed, but hell, you can get a really long ride in an ambulance while you wait to die!
5) A toll highway cropped up...after Ontarians paid for the damn thing. Mike wanted to privatize it because that made sense. So now we're paying to drive on a road that we paid to build!
6) Harris has allowed private universities...after the University of Phoenix hired two full-time lobbyists to play golf with him. Need I mention that the University of Phoenix doesn't have the best track record and has repeatedly been criticized by colleges in the States.
And all this and more...for a lousy tax break that nobody seems to feel.
My prediction for the election is that all the provinces from Ontario east to Newfoundland will be the Liberal stronghold with some inroads by the Bloc, and the PCs. Alberta and all the provinces east of it up to Ontario, will be won by the Canadian Alliance with some inroads by the Liberals. And I'll bet that British Columbia votes Liberal with some inroads by all the parties. The Liberals are going to win no matter what.
I'm not really for any government, but I'll be voting Liberal. Primarily because the MP for my area has called my house (and not just at election time) to see how everything is going and asking for opinions. But also because they're not extreme. The CA is extreme and they've hired some great marketers to try to appeal to everyone.
It ain't gonna work. Your average Canadian Joe Blow, say earns $35,000. He will save $500 on taxes under the CA plan. When he weighs this, against the possibility of having to pay for health care and education for his kids, he'll gladly pay up the $500.
In general, I think us Canadian voters have been screwed so many times by promised tax cuts that we should know better by now..of course I can say "na na na boo boo, I told ya so"...I have never voted (or wanted to vote when I was younger) for a government that has promised drastic tax cuts. No government can meet the sort of things the Canadian Alliance talks about in its platform. It just won't hold up under scrutiny!
-GL
I've got to disagree with what is being said about the Canadian Alliance and their tax cut. First you criticize them because you say 17% is too drastic and will never work. Then you acknowledge that they've adapted it to a 17% / 24% rate without revising your criticism of the 17% rate.
Why do you assume necessarily that Canada will not be able to fund services with a tax break. Tax revenue could be calculated (simplified version) as: Taxable Income * Tax Rate. If tax rate goes down, you'd think tax revenue goes down. However, don't forget that as tax rate goes down, taxable income goes up, because companies have a greater incentive to stay in Canada. I would really like to see how the Liberal government woudl react if Nortel, JDS Uniphase and a bunch of other high tech companies finally said they'd had enough and moved to the States. The loss of billions of dollars of tax money would materialize, all because the government is still overtaxing us.
I think tax relief is long overdue, and the Liberals obviously have no commitment to this (lying about GST, haven't done much in their 8 years in power, etc.)
As for the Alliance being extreme, what are you so worried they are going to do anyway? Many of their so-called "extreme" positions are the same position taken by the Liberal Party, it's just that they have the PERCEPTION of being non-extreme. Saying the Alliance is just the Reform with a new name and leader is both wrong and again feeding on the perception of extremism. I reiterate: what exactly is it you're so worried they'll do that's so terrible and extreme? And then support these allegations with their stated policy. And then show that the Liberals do not think in this way. A difficult triad of things to show.
Anyway, politics is a touchy topic no doubt, so no one take anything personally please. It is nice to read about Canadian politics here instead of the endless Bush/Gore threads that were everywhere.
Why do you assume necessarily that Canada will not be able to fund services with a tax break. Tax revenue could be calculated (simplified version) as: Taxable Income * Tax Rate. If tax rate goes down, you'd think tax revenue goes down. However, don't forget that as tax rate goes down, taxable income goes up, because companies have a greater incentive to stay in Canada. I would really like to see how the Liberal government woudl react if Nortel, JDS Uniphase and a bunch of other high tech companies finally said they'd had enough and moved to the States. The loss of billions of dollars of tax money would materialize, all because the government is still overtaxing us.
I think tax relief is long overdue, and the Liberals obviously have no commitment to this (lying about GST, haven't done much in their 8 years in power, etc.)
As for the Alliance being extreme, what are you so worried they are going to do anyway? Many of their so-called "extreme" positions are the same position taken by the Liberal Party, it's just that they have the PERCEPTION of being non-extreme. Saying the Alliance is just the Reform with a new name and leader is both wrong and again feeding on the perception of extremism. I reiterate: what exactly is it you're so worried they'll do that's so terrible and extreme? And then support these allegations with their stated policy. And then show that the Liberals do not think in this way. A difficult triad of things to show.
Anyway, politics is a touchy topic no doubt, so no one take anything personally please. It is nice to read about Canadian politics here instead of the endless Bush/Gore threads that were everywhere.
dennilfloss
Past Lifer 1957-2014 In Memoriam
THELAIR,
The only other one I know is D'Arcy McGee, one of the Fathers Of Confederation, assassinated in April 1868 about 15 minutes walk from where I live.
Time To Say Goodbye (Montell Jordan)
The only other one I know is D'Arcy McGee, one of the Fathers Of Confederation, assassinated in April 1868 about 15 minutes walk from where I live.
Time To Say Goodbye (Montell Jordan)
Eug
Lifer
Personally I liked the name Canadian Reform Alliance Party better. 😉
Yeah, the people who throw stuff at rallies are morons. Stockwell Day was a good sport about it, but the man who did it should be convicted and have a record (even though I think the sentence should be very light).
The names of parties don't necessarily completely represent their policies these days. I note the lefty NDP back in Saskatchewan years ago winning power based on a platform of closing hospitals and fiscal restraint, after the righty Progessive Conservatives spent so much.
Anyways, I'm glad to see the Alliance has backed off on the 17% tax concept. It was obviously at this point unworkable and if implemented immediately would destroy our standard of living. However, although I'm happy to pay my taxes, I would like some relief, but going straight to 17% (even within 8 years) would create chaos. The lower tax rate is ironic, because the 17% tax policy would benefit the poor the least, without some concessions made specifically to the poor. (Actually, they would get pretty significant tax breaks - sounds rather lefty to me. 😉)
Yeah, the people who throw stuff at rallies are morons. Stockwell Day was a good sport about it, but the man who did it should be convicted and have a record (even though I think the sentence should be very light).
The names of parties don't necessarily completely represent their policies these days. I note the lefty NDP back in Saskatchewan years ago winning power based on a platform of closing hospitals and fiscal restraint, after the righty Progessive Conservatives spent so much.
Anyways, I'm glad to see the Alliance has backed off on the 17% tax concept. It was obviously at this point unworkable and if implemented immediately would destroy our standard of living. However, although I'm happy to pay my taxes, I would like some relief, but going straight to 17% (even within 8 years) would create chaos. The lower tax rate is ironic, because the 17% tax policy would benefit the poor the least, without some concessions made specifically to the poor. (Actually, they would get pretty significant tax breaks - sounds rather lefty to me. 😉)
Handle,
There is an economics prof at U of T where I go to school that attends all the major economic functions and has been to meetings with Paul Martin and previous finance ministers. This is unworkable as he even stated - Canada's tax base is just so small...you can't begin to compare us to the Americans when they have a 10 fold advantage in population. And as I pointed out before, considering the massive population of the states, we're doing pretty good tax-wise at a federal level. Anyways, the CA's plan looks nice on paper. But you can't have your cake and eat it too. You either get the tax rate down to 17% and drop universal health care, subsidized post secondary education, and other such benefits of living in Canada, or you keep the tax rate at a reasonable multi-tiered level that it is at now. I'm not saying that taxes should be at their current rate, but for goodness sakes you have to gradually implement such a system. In fact, cutting taxes in such a short time could shoot inflation through the roof. With all the extra money in Canadian's pockets all of a sudden, and the usual tendency not to save this income because they view it as "free" money, I have no doubt in my mind that inflation would sharply increase.
The CA is hypocritical. Look at their platform. They claim that they will do away with government catering to big business, while at the same time claiming that they will cut taxes for high-tech businesses. Furthermore, the CA claims to want to fix the health care system. What they want to do is privatize it. Need I look any further than Alberta, Stockwell Day's home province where he was Finance Minister, to show you that they will not fix health care. Am I not mistaken that Alberta really really really wants to privatize their system? Privatizing the Canadian health care system would kill it - with a private health care system giant south of the border, Canadian hospitals would be bought up by big American corporations and guess what? We'd lose control of our health care system. Yeah that's grrrrreat! Now I can pay $10 for a tylenol pill next time I have to visit the hospital.
They also want to grab away a lot of control from the Supreme Court. They use the case of the Supreme Court legalizing possession of child porn as their rally cry for why it'll be good to do it. I'm sorry. Canadian law should not be controlled by a party that is hardline Christian - and I'm Catholic. I firmly believe in separation of Church and State.
And the CA is the Reform party, and arguing that it is not is just laughable. How many MPs from the Reform party will be running under the Canadian Alliance title?
Look, I certainly agree with some of the CA's policies such as not penalizing stay at home parents in terms of taxes. That totally makes sense. But look at the big picture. Stockwell claims to be a financial guru because, in his own words, he's "handled billions of dollars" as an Alberta Finance Minister. I'm sorry, but running a province such as Alberta and running a country such as Canada are not one in the same. It is like a bioligist claiming to be an expert astronomer because he was good in his science. The two expertises aren't transferable. Canada's economy is so much more dynamic and complex than Alberta's.
I'm just going to end arguing. I'd be lying if I said I want to change your opinion. But I'm not trying to get you guys to like the Liberals, because as I've stated before, I'm voting for them out of a lack of better options, so I'm not all to excited about their policies either.
I just wish that Canadians would run through the numbers a bit more. It doesn't take a genius to realize that the CA's policies do not add up, never will and completely disintegrate if Canada's economy suddenly takes a nosedive.
-GL
There is an economics prof at U of T where I go to school that attends all the major economic functions and has been to meetings with Paul Martin and previous finance ministers. This is unworkable as he even stated - Canada's tax base is just so small...you can't begin to compare us to the Americans when they have a 10 fold advantage in population. And as I pointed out before, considering the massive population of the states, we're doing pretty good tax-wise at a federal level. Anyways, the CA's plan looks nice on paper. But you can't have your cake and eat it too. You either get the tax rate down to 17% and drop universal health care, subsidized post secondary education, and other such benefits of living in Canada, or you keep the tax rate at a reasonable multi-tiered level that it is at now. I'm not saying that taxes should be at their current rate, but for goodness sakes you have to gradually implement such a system. In fact, cutting taxes in such a short time could shoot inflation through the roof. With all the extra money in Canadian's pockets all of a sudden, and the usual tendency not to save this income because they view it as "free" money, I have no doubt in my mind that inflation would sharply increase.
The CA is hypocritical. Look at their platform. They claim that they will do away with government catering to big business, while at the same time claiming that they will cut taxes for high-tech businesses. Furthermore, the CA claims to want to fix the health care system. What they want to do is privatize it. Need I look any further than Alberta, Stockwell Day's home province where he was Finance Minister, to show you that they will not fix health care. Am I not mistaken that Alberta really really really wants to privatize their system? Privatizing the Canadian health care system would kill it - with a private health care system giant south of the border, Canadian hospitals would be bought up by big American corporations and guess what? We'd lose control of our health care system. Yeah that's grrrrreat! Now I can pay $10 for a tylenol pill next time I have to visit the hospital.
They also want to grab away a lot of control from the Supreme Court. They use the case of the Supreme Court legalizing possession of child porn as their rally cry for why it'll be good to do it. I'm sorry. Canadian law should not be controlled by a party that is hardline Christian - and I'm Catholic. I firmly believe in separation of Church and State.
And the CA is the Reform party, and arguing that it is not is just laughable. How many MPs from the Reform party will be running under the Canadian Alliance title?
Look, I certainly agree with some of the CA's policies such as not penalizing stay at home parents in terms of taxes. That totally makes sense. But look at the big picture. Stockwell claims to be a financial guru because, in his own words, he's "handled billions of dollars" as an Alberta Finance Minister. I'm sorry, but running a province such as Alberta and running a country such as Canada are not one in the same. It is like a bioligist claiming to be an expert astronomer because he was good in his science. The two expertises aren't transferable. Canada's economy is so much more dynamic and complex than Alberta's.
I'm just going to end arguing. I'd be lying if I said I want to change your opinion. But I'm not trying to get you guys to like the Liberals, because as I've stated before, I'm voting for them out of a lack of better options, so I'm not all to excited about their policies either.
I just wish that Canadians would run through the numbers a bit more. It doesn't take a genius to realize that the CA's policies do not add up, never will and completely disintegrate if Canada's economy suddenly takes a nosedive.
-GL
GL,
Certainly you're right on many points, but if there is one thing that is turning me off the Liberal Party, it's Jean Chretien. If Paul Martin was the leader, then I would reconsider my position on the Liberals, because in my view, a change of leadership would result in a lot of change within a party (also applicable to CA/Reform and Day/Manning). I just find that Jean Chretien has not done much and that Paul Martin would do a better job. If I'm not mistaken, they're not exactly the best of friends, and I think that the best thing the Liberal Party has (Martin) is being suppressed.
The latest stuff following the death of Trudeau is further turning me off Chretien. Using Trudeau to try and help him win another election, renaming a named mountain after Trudeau immediately after the funeral... playing around with election dates... all of these things would definitely turn me off of voting for Chretien's Liberals as the default when there's a lack of better alternatives. I can't think of many good, positive things Chretien has done for the country.
As I stated though, I find the Liberals under Paul Martin to be a more appealing choice.
Certainly you're right on many points, but if there is one thing that is turning me off the Liberal Party, it's Jean Chretien. If Paul Martin was the leader, then I would reconsider my position on the Liberals, because in my view, a change of leadership would result in a lot of change within a party (also applicable to CA/Reform and Day/Manning). I just find that Jean Chretien has not done much and that Paul Martin would do a better job. If I'm not mistaken, they're not exactly the best of friends, and I think that the best thing the Liberal Party has (Martin) is being suppressed.
The latest stuff following the death of Trudeau is further turning me off Chretien. Using Trudeau to try and help him win another election, renaming a named mountain after Trudeau immediately after the funeral... playing around with election dates... all of these things would definitely turn me off of voting for Chretien's Liberals as the default when there's a lack of better alternatives. I can't think of many good, positive things Chretien has done for the country.
As I stated though, I find the Liberals under Paul Martin to be a more appealing choice.
Handle,
I agree. Jean Cretien is evil...I still have to talk to my brother but apparently Cretien is really devious...my brother read this book that outlined many of the devious actions made by Cretien and I want to see what it says.
If my friend's economics prof is right, Paul Martin is going to run for prime minister this time around. Rumour has it that Cretien either resigns his post, or the majority of the Liberals will switch their backing to Martin and force Martin to become leader in a pretty interesting coup. Let's see how this plays out. Also according to the economics prof, the election won't be until next April, so that Cretien can save face and resign after two full terms as PM.
-GL
I agree. Jean Cretien is evil...I still have to talk to my brother but apparently Cretien is really devious...my brother read this book that outlined many of the devious actions made by Cretien and I want to see what it says.
If my friend's economics prof is right, Paul Martin is going to run for prime minister this time around. Rumour has it that Cretien either resigns his post, or the majority of the Liberals will switch their backing to Martin and force Martin to become leader in a pretty interesting coup. Let's see how this plays out. Also according to the economics prof, the election won't be until next April, so that Cretien can save face and resign after two full terms as PM.
-GL
GL, you're completely off base about Alberta.
Bill 11 is what you are referring to. It is NOT about privatization. It's about contracting out SIMPLE, ONE DAY services to private clinics. WHY in God's name should a hospital be doing simple stuff like removing a wart? Other things include eye surgery (we have the world class Gimbel clinic here). Hospital staff have more important things to do.
Clinics cannot charge anymore than the gov't specified rate for these services. It's up to the clinics to make money WITHIN these parameters.
Bill 11 is what you are referring to. It is NOT about privatization. It's about contracting out SIMPLE, ONE DAY services to private clinics. WHY in God's name should a hospital be doing simple stuff like removing a wart? Other things include eye surgery (we have the world class Gimbel clinic here). Hospital staff have more important things to do.
Clinics cannot charge anymore than the gov't specified rate for these services. It's up to the clinics to make money WITHIN these parameters.
GL,
I always thought there was already a leadership tussle of sorts and that Jean Chretien (spitefully, unwisely, for whatever reason) decided he wanted to run again and then (if I remember right from what I read) resign 2 years into his third term. I thought that sounded weird but that's what I remember. I sort-of doubt a coup within the party like that. Even if it did take place, it would probably be viewed in a negative light (there's not enough disenchantment in the public for it to be viewed as a necessary step) and the opposition parties would have no problems in portraying such a disarrayed party as being unfit to govern. If Chretien resigned himself that'd be fine, but I don't see much of an indication of that happening--he seems as indignant as ever.
And about the Alberta issue. I'm from Alberta and I don't understand why the federal government (and Brian Tobin from Newfoundland) insists on demonizing us. We put up with so much abuse from Ottawa (withholding transfer payments for health, federal meddling in our affairs [Bill 11]) and they still find it necessary to slam a region of this country. It's not like what we do is so evil that they must pick on us, they just do it in immature spite. If Alberta were to legislate that all non-English signs had to be 1/2 the size of their English counterparts, I'm sure Alberta would be fined, demonized, belittled, etc. yet they bow down to Quebec and their similar laws. It's insane.
The federal government's abuse of Alberta is like a mayoral candidate openly mocking the residents of the southwestern quadrant--it's folly, but due to the massive centralization of power in Ontario/Quebec, they can get away with it. It's not that Ontarians per se hate Albertans (at least I doubt it), and the Harris government doesn't seem to hate us, but the Liberals in Ottawa just love to slam us. Then they wonder why we don't vote for the Liberals, they wonder why there's Western Alienation and then they set up Regional Exploration Committees or whatever it was called to explore their own country. Hello??? This federal government is supposed to represent the entire nation, yet they understand so little about the West that they need an exploration commitee!?!? I can't understand those Liberals sometimes.
Rant over 🙂
I always thought there was already a leadership tussle of sorts and that Jean Chretien (spitefully, unwisely, for whatever reason) decided he wanted to run again and then (if I remember right from what I read) resign 2 years into his third term. I thought that sounded weird but that's what I remember. I sort-of doubt a coup within the party like that. Even if it did take place, it would probably be viewed in a negative light (there's not enough disenchantment in the public for it to be viewed as a necessary step) and the opposition parties would have no problems in portraying such a disarrayed party as being unfit to govern. If Chretien resigned himself that'd be fine, but I don't see much of an indication of that happening--he seems as indignant as ever.
And about the Alberta issue. I'm from Alberta and I don't understand why the federal government (and Brian Tobin from Newfoundland) insists on demonizing us. We put up with so much abuse from Ottawa (withholding transfer payments for health, federal meddling in our affairs [Bill 11]) and they still find it necessary to slam a region of this country. It's not like what we do is so evil that they must pick on us, they just do it in immature spite. If Alberta were to legislate that all non-English signs had to be 1/2 the size of their English counterparts, I'm sure Alberta would be fined, demonized, belittled, etc. yet they bow down to Quebec and their similar laws. It's insane.
The federal government's abuse of Alberta is like a mayoral candidate openly mocking the residents of the southwestern quadrant--it's folly, but due to the massive centralization of power in Ontario/Quebec, they can get away with it. It's not that Ontarians per se hate Albertans (at least I doubt it), and the Harris government doesn't seem to hate us, but the Liberals in Ottawa just love to slam us. Then they wonder why we don't vote for the Liberals, they wonder why there's Western Alienation and then they set up Regional Exploration Committees or whatever it was called to explore their own country. Hello??? This federal government is supposed to represent the entire nation, yet they understand so little about the West that they need an exploration commitee!?!? I can't understand those Liberals sometimes.
Rant over 🙂
The thing about Bill 11 is that it is cleverly disguised. Ask any lawyer if it opens up the possibility to private hospitals and they'll say yes. What constitutes simple day surgery? Wanna bet that an American hospital would argue an apendectomy (sp?) was simple? Or, how about removal of gall bladder stones. That's simple too. The government wants to make the public think it'll only be for "surgeries", like Shazam said, wart-removal and such. And I wouldn't be against that. But as soon as a clinic challenges the law in court, it just won't hold up under scrutiny. When it comes to the type of health care Canada has, there is a huge dam preventing it from going privatized. As soon as you spot a tiny leak, however insignificant it seems, that leak expand and expands until the whole dam just breaks. If you look at any country that has tampered with privatization of a non-private health care system, you see that the non-private "free" health care system went down the drain.
Do I think witholding transfer payments is right? Out of principle yes, although this severely hurts Albertans who desperately need help and so I wouldn't do it. The Albertan government called the Liberals bluff and lost though.
Look, the reason why I'm totally against any sort of privatization of the health care system is simple. All Canadians, including Albertans, have paid so much in taxes that we deserve it. Not only that, but there is a surplus of money; enough to cover procedures that these private ones would have customers pay for. If I lived in Alberta I'd be damn pissed...I'd feel like I was not getting what I was paying for through taxes. I feel mad enough that Ontarians paid for highway 407 and that we now have to pay again to drive on it because that got privatized too. I feel kinda pissed because my teeth aren't considered part of my body, enough so that OHIP will cover my visits to the dentist!
Do you know why a lot of things in Canada such as the health care system, the education system, up until a few years ago even Bell Canada and Petro Canada were either fully government run or partially? The point is (or was, in the case of Bell et al) to provide a consistent and guaranteed level of service across Canada - which has a completely scattered and diverse population. The point is that a Canadian in Newfoundland knows that he can move to Alberta and still get the same health care, still get the same education for his kids, etc. Privatizing these systems just messes with this consistency. Canada has traditionally needed government to intervene in these "industries" because there just wasn't the market base to provide for proper levels of service. Had the Canadian medical system been privatized from the get-go, there wouldn't be hospitals in remote rural locations. It just wouldn't be profitable. Now, for the likes of Petro Canada, the reason they stopped being crown corporations is because there was no purpose for being one now. The guaranteed level of service was matched or exceeded by competitors. I highly doubt that a private medical system could match or exceed the breadth and reach of the Canadian one. Sure, maybe there would be shorter line-ups for people in major cities who were rich enough...but for the likes of your average Joe out in farm country somewhere...what's he to do?
There is a great history to the economic differences between Canada and the U.S. Our politicians like to spout off about why we should be more like the Americans. Well, give us another 220 million people evenly distributed across the country such as is the case with the U.S., and maybe I'll listen. We're different! Let's get over that fact and make solutions that work for us, not copy ones that, arguably, haven't even worked for our southern neighbours whom they were intended for.
Anyhow, let's keep up the dialog. I love the fact that two Canadians can disagree and not end up flaming eachother...like our American brethren always do in their Democrats vs Republican threads😉 Besides, us Torontonians tend to be so fixated on ourselves we never get to hear what opinions our neighbours out west have on these issues - just remember that we do care about you all out east, we're just a little Narcissistic🙂
-GL
Do I think witholding transfer payments is right? Out of principle yes, although this severely hurts Albertans who desperately need help and so I wouldn't do it. The Albertan government called the Liberals bluff and lost though.
Look, the reason why I'm totally against any sort of privatization of the health care system is simple. All Canadians, including Albertans, have paid so much in taxes that we deserve it. Not only that, but there is a surplus of money; enough to cover procedures that these private ones would have customers pay for. If I lived in Alberta I'd be damn pissed...I'd feel like I was not getting what I was paying for through taxes. I feel mad enough that Ontarians paid for highway 407 and that we now have to pay again to drive on it because that got privatized too. I feel kinda pissed because my teeth aren't considered part of my body, enough so that OHIP will cover my visits to the dentist!
Do you know why a lot of things in Canada such as the health care system, the education system, up until a few years ago even Bell Canada and Petro Canada were either fully government run or partially? The point is (or was, in the case of Bell et al) to provide a consistent and guaranteed level of service across Canada - which has a completely scattered and diverse population. The point is that a Canadian in Newfoundland knows that he can move to Alberta and still get the same health care, still get the same education for his kids, etc. Privatizing these systems just messes with this consistency. Canada has traditionally needed government to intervene in these "industries" because there just wasn't the market base to provide for proper levels of service. Had the Canadian medical system been privatized from the get-go, there wouldn't be hospitals in remote rural locations. It just wouldn't be profitable. Now, for the likes of Petro Canada, the reason they stopped being crown corporations is because there was no purpose for being one now. The guaranteed level of service was matched or exceeded by competitors. I highly doubt that a private medical system could match or exceed the breadth and reach of the Canadian one. Sure, maybe there would be shorter line-ups for people in major cities who were rich enough...but for the likes of your average Joe out in farm country somewhere...what's he to do?
There is a great history to the economic differences between Canada and the U.S. Our politicians like to spout off about why we should be more like the Americans. Well, give us another 220 million people evenly distributed across the country such as is the case with the U.S., and maybe I'll listen. We're different! Let's get over that fact and make solutions that work for us, not copy ones that, arguably, haven't even worked for our southern neighbours whom they were intended for.
Anyhow, let's keep up the dialog. I love the fact that two Canadians can disagree and not end up flaming eachother...like our American brethren always do in their Democrats vs Republican threads😉 Besides, us Torontonians tend to be so fixated on ourselves we never get to hear what opinions our neighbours out west have on these issues - just remember that we do care about you all out east, we're just a little Narcissistic🙂
-GL