Search results

Panic is only for the unprepared...and will NEVER make you any money.

The Liberal Sponsorship Scandal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponsorship_scandal The sponsorship scandal, "AdScam", "Sponsorship" or Sponsorgate, is a scandal that came as a result of a Canadian federal government "sponsorship program" in the province of Quebec and involving the...

I never said that, so I wonder where this comment came from. It's a shame you are such a coward that you had to create a new username just to post this.

I never brought up communism. Referencing a communist with socialist ideology does not equate to calling someone a communist. Again, I am not sure why you insist on giving the government more of your money. Do you honestly believe they spend your money better than you spend your own money?

They are buy two examples in a long line of similar government programs. I take exception with the entire healthcare system in general, not any specific program. As I said, a two-tier system would be ideal. Healthcare for all, plus advanced service for those willing to pay for it. Are you...

You couldn't be more wrong. I consider myself fiscally conservative and socially center. My reluctance to pay for the mistakes of others has nothing to do with "extremism".

$2 per vote for starters. Subsidies for the arts. Many of the government run healthcare initiatives. Not to mention the fact that every new government programs also creates a slew of bureacracy in the name of "this oversight committee" and "the whatchamacall it panel", etc. Just look at...

That is the fault of the government, not the corporation. The free market dictates that the contract goes to the lowest bidder. If the corporation wastes its resources, it goes bankrupt. That's at least how it SHOULD work, as long as the government doesn't use my tax dollars to clean up...

Again, don't put words in my mouth. I never said all social programs are waste. But many are. Denial of this fact is naive. Why should I have to pay for someone else to go to university?

:D Do you read this before you posted? This sounds like something directly out of a Stalin speech! "Each according to their means and ability, for the collective good of society!" Fuck that bullshit. I work for myself, not some freeloading socialist that produces half the amount I...

I never said that, you're putting words in my mouth. You asked what bad things Harper inherited, so I answered that question and nothing more. The best way to tackle those challenges is to reduce government spending enough so that they can afford to fix the problems that the private sector...

Not all of us believe that the government can spend our money better than we ourselves can. A better approach than the government taking care of our poor little souls, would be to take some self-responsibility. Let me keep my own money. Let me save my own money. So when there is an economic...

Not a bad idea at all. Let's reduce spending and build up a surplus! Spending cuts will get us much further ahead than tax increases. There is a lot of waste when government handles money. Cut out the wasteful spending, watch the surplus grow. But don't punish me by raising my taxes to...

This is wrong in so many ways. Government is supposed to work for the people, not the other way around! If I have been living a peaceful, happy existence in Canada for say 50 years, and all of a sudden a new government policy states taxes to go up %50, does that mean I should just move...

I do not follow American politics closely enough to know what administration implemented what specific policies, so I have no comment there. But as for the bad that Harper inherited, just a couple examples would be a giant infrastructure deficit, a war in Afghanistan, and ballooning...

Perhaps this discussion needs an injection of common sense - can we not admit that every new administration inherits their share of shit and their share of good? Your reluctance to admit Obama did not inherit any good, and Harper did not inherit any bad is naive.

Socially or fiscally?

Agreed. Which is why a certain level of taxation is necessary for a country. The question is - what level of taxation is necessary, and what level of taxation is overcumbersome and akin to extortion? I believe Canada can afford to lower taxes, because they have more than enough tax money...

Why does the economy need to be weak in order to lower taxes? I, for one, know I can spend my money better than the government can spend my money. I welcome tax cuts anywhere in the business cycle. Provided the country is not burdened by staggering debt, mind you, which Canada is not and has...

So you would like to see the government extort more money from citizens? Because that's what it is. Government to citizens: "Pay up more of your hard earned cash, or else we'll allow the big bad corporations to get you!"