I am an ignorant person. I have worked with poor folks for 30 years. My kids watched as heroin addicts to come down crashed on our couch. I have stood with a destitute mother of 4 who's partner just left her. I have seen cupboards as bare as a baby's butt. Or children who wear soiled diapers because there was no money to buy any. I have seen the trap of alcoholism where a parent buys a mickey instead of child's shoes. I know the deep darkness of depression and mental illness, exacerbated by stress. I have watched suicides be lowered 6 feet down.
This sort of poverty is very difficult. It tends to set up patterns that are hard to break. I have no beef with the wealthy. I am glad for those who can hire people struggling to stand up--and do so without taking advantage of them. I am glad we offer something to people scraping bottom. Though we raised 4 kids with a salary/living below the poverty line, there was always enough soup in the pot for someone in worse shape than we were.
Sometimes I think that the difference between a rich man, a comfortable man, and a poor man has a significant luck factor. If you are comfortable, and there is nothing wrong with that, it can be difficult to really understand the death-grip of poverty. I am not sure 20k cash would help most of these people. I can see the vampires moving in: the drug dealers, the payday cash places, and credit companies that specialize in gouging the poor with 40% interest rates. *All vampires* should be illegal. A lot of that money would pay off their debts..and give them a chance to get the monkey off their backs. Perhaps a couple mandatory financial orienteering classes before receiving the cash would help a lot, given many of them have never seen a 2000.00 cheque.
Studies from long ago realized that 100% of income received by the poor returns to the economy. So 56 billion dollars would be a shot in the arm to some aspects of the economy. And would ripple through it generating wealth and jobs for more Canadians--I suppose that is,
Monday, November 22, 2010
I criticize that atrocity. It is very concerning to see that sort of racism or religious intolerance in a democratic society. And I consider myself a friend of Israel. It is healthy to be able to expose any such failure whether it happen here, (recall the recent cross-burning) or there.
It is important to differentiate however, Canada is not a country of Cross burners, nor is Israel such a country. The matter should be resolved appropriately, so in the response, the justice issue is the point of valid critique.
To place it on a the nation reflects the new-antisemitism because the isssue of prejudicial motive is exposed. Consider the ludicrous idea that Canada is a country of the Klu Klux Clan.
It is important to differentiate however, Canada is not a country of Cross burners, nor is Israel such a country. The matter should be resolved appropriately, so in the response, the justice issue is the point of valid critique.
To place it on a the nation reflects the new-antisemitism because the isssue of prejudicial motive is exposed. Consider the ludicrous idea that Canada is a country of the Klu Klux Clan.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
The Poor
I am an ignorant person. I have worked with poor folks for 30 years. My kids watched as heroin addicts to come down crashed on our couch. I have stood with a destitute mother of 4 who's partner just left her. I have seen cupboards as bare as a baby's butt. Or children who wear soiled diapers because there was no money to buy any. I have seen the trap of alcoholism where a parent buys a mickey instead of child's shoes. I know the deep darkness of depression and mental illness, exacerbated by stress. I have watched suicides be lowered 6 feet down.
This sort of poverty is very difficult. It tends to set up patterns that are hard to break. I have no beef with the wealthy. I am glad for those who can hire people struggling to stand up--and do so without taking advantage of them. I am glad we offer something to people scraping bottom. Though we raised 4 kids living below the poverty line, there was always enough soup in the pot for someone in worse shape than we were.
Sometimes I think that the difference between a rich man, a comfortable man, and a poor man has a significant luck factor. If you are comfortable, and there is nothing wrong with that, it can be difficult to really understand the death-grip of poverty. I am not sure 20k cash would help most of these people. I can see the vampires move in: the drug dealers, the payday cash places, and credit companies that specialize in gouging the poor with 40% interest rates. *All vampires* should be illegal.
Studies from long ago realized that 100% of income received by the poor returns to the economy. So 56 billion dollars would be a shot in the arm to some aspects of the economy. And would ripple through it generating wealth and jobs for more Canadians--I suppose that is, all that money that would be left if they could pay off their debts...
This sort of poverty is very difficult. It tends to set up patterns that are hard to break. I have no beef with the wealthy. I am glad for those who can hire people struggling to stand up--and do so without taking advantage of them. I am glad we offer something to people scraping bottom. Though we raised 4 kids living below the poverty line, there was always enough soup in the pot for someone in worse shape than we were.
Sometimes I think that the difference between a rich man, a comfortable man, and a poor man has a significant luck factor. If you are comfortable, and there is nothing wrong with that, it can be difficult to really understand the death-grip of poverty. I am not sure 20k cash would help most of these people. I can see the vampires move in: the drug dealers, the payday cash places, and credit companies that specialize in gouging the poor with 40% interest rates. *All vampires* should be illegal.
Studies from long ago realized that 100% of income received by the poor returns to the economy. So 56 billion dollars would be a shot in the arm to some aspects of the economy. And would ripple through it generating wealth and jobs for more Canadians--I suppose that is, all that money that would be left if they could pay off their debts...
Friday, November 19, 2010
Harper's Genius
I respect that. I think the Conservatives displayed brilliant strategy this week. They have been on the record for Senate reform for ever. However, the opposition have blocked every attempt at it. Alright the CPC says, I guess we will have to play the game the way its always been. They have to appoint replacement senators, the Liberal majority in the Senate has been defeating and thwarting the government's agenda. Because this is done behind the scenes and not on the floor of the house, and because the Liberals have dominated the Senate for so long, we never heard about it.
Now that tool is disappearing, so they are crying about it. Harper has seen the only way to get Senate reform is 1) To get a majority in both houses. 2)Demonstrate by way of crisis, some of the problems with keeping the Senate from reformation. 3)Introduce Senate Reform legislation while the keening need is on everyone's mind.
Like him or not, you have to admit, its brilliant. Harper has demonstrated his genius, and history will remember him for it
Now that tool is disappearing, so they are crying about it. Harper has seen the only way to get Senate reform is 1) To get a majority in both houses. 2)Demonstrate by way of crisis, some of the problems with keeping the Senate from reformation. 3)Introduce Senate Reform legislation while the keening need is on everyone's mind.
Like him or not, you have to admit, its brilliant. Harper has demonstrated his genius, and history will remember him for it
Don't be ridiculous. Are you so ignorant to not know the way the Senate has worked since confederation?
The party in power if it stays in power long enough secures the majority of the Senate.
The idea was that the composition of the Senate would change slower over time than the HoC, so that governments that win sequential majorities, who thereby have indicated they are governing well enough to win most of the seats in sequential elections, those governments be ceded the power of the majority of both the HoC and Senate to further a sustained mandate. An election of a HoC in a fluke angry election, or a reactionary minority is restrained by virtue of the much slower shift of power in the Senate.
The party in power if it stays in power long enough secures the majority of the Senate.
The idea was that the composition of the Senate would change slower over time than the HoC, so that governments that win sequential majorities, who thereby have indicated they are governing well enough to win most of the seats in sequential elections, those governments be ceded the power of the majority of both the HoC and Senate to further a sustained mandate. An election of a HoC in a fluke angry election, or a reactionary minority is restrained by virtue of the much slower shift of power in the Senate.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
As copyright legislation looms...
This legislation is nothing but a rip-off of the rights of the citizens of this country.
Copyright law was originally established to protect the rights of citizens, while balancing incentive for invention/innovation/creativity. It gave the originator 7 years. Thats it. No royalty for life nonsense No portofolio for Michael Jackson, no Beatles royalties continuing to enrich the pockets of Paul McCartney. Hey, he is a nice guy but does society want to continue its over-excessive riches for the few?
One copy of a purchased song/cd is ridiculous. For ages, one could make as many copies as they wanted so long it is for personal use. Why change it?
If one lives in a big city in Canada, there are plenty of FM stations to listen to music on--for free. But not in Gimli Manitoba, or Creston, BC. This will mean as the public is forced to turn on the old FM radios once again, the vast majority of the Canadian landscape will have to go back to the stone age--listening to AM skip.
Copyright law was originally established to protect the rights of citizens, while balancing incentive for invention/innovation/creativity. It gave the originator 7 years. Thats it. No royalty for life nonsense No portofolio for Michael Jackson, no Beatles royalties continuing to enrich the pockets of Paul McCartney. Hey, he is a nice guy but does society want to continue its over-excessive riches for the few?
One copy of a purchased song/cd is ridiculous. For ages, one could make as many copies as they wanted so long it is for personal use. Why change it?
If one lives in a big city in Canada, there are plenty of FM stations to listen to music on--for free. But not in Gimli Manitoba, or Creston, BC. This will mean as the public is forced to turn on the old FM radios once again, the vast majority of the Canadian landscape will have to go back to the stone age--listening to AM skip.
Chaos the Stuff of Creation
Owen Abrey May I suggest Margaret Wheatly's book "Leadership and the New Science?" I came away from her thinking believing: "chaos is the stuff of creation."
The Senate and Minority Governments
What Canada witnessed here was a legitimate lever of this democracy. It is has come to light because we have had a minority government for 5 years. The balance of power in the senate tends to shift in favor of the governing party over time. In the case of majorities freshly elected, it usually results in a frustration of the political agenda of the ruling party. Since the Senate, for example, will tend to have more Liberals than Conservatives for many years after the Conservatives lets say, win the majority and visa versa..
This is the reason political parties stack the senate. Its always been that way, and will continue to be that way until we have meaningful senate reform.
What is unique is that the current government is a minority government. It hasn't had full control of legislation. So a bill like this can pass the house regardless if the bill is in sync with the government agenda. There has been near-hysteria in the house for a bit over a year as liberal senators have reached mandatory retirement, and have been replaced by Conservatives. The Liberals have been using their majority in the senate to block, delay, and deep-six bills passed by the majority in the house for 5 years. (To say that isn't so is intellectual dishonesty.) Now that senate majority is slipping away.
Despite the weakness of a minority government in the house, the rules still allow the government to choose senators. In any minority government, regardless of party, the power of the senate will rise to levels not typically seen in Majorities. This can be seen obviously by the fact that the Conservatives would have defeated the bill in the house had they the majority. Legislation like this would never even see the senate except in minority government situation
This is the reason political parties stack the senate. Its always been that way, and will continue to be that way until we have meaningful senate reform.
What is unique is that the current government is a minority government. It hasn't had full control of legislation. So a bill like this can pass the house regardless if the bill is in sync with the government agenda. There has been near-hysteria in the house for a bit over a year as liberal senators have reached mandatory retirement, and have been replaced by Conservatives. The Liberals have been using their majority in the senate to block, delay, and deep-six bills passed by the majority in the house for 5 years. (To say that isn't so is intellectual dishonesty.) Now that senate majority is slipping away.
Despite the weakness of a minority government in the house, the rules still allow the government to choose senators. In any minority government, regardless of party, the power of the senate will rise to levels not typically seen in Majorities. This can be seen obviously by the fact that the Conservatives would have defeated the bill in the house had they the majority. Legislation like this would never even see the senate except in minority government situation
Bill Bennet and Mr. Campbell
For 6 months I have been saying this is Campbell's opportunity to bow out gracefully--with his reputation more-or-less intact. The problem for his posterity is the longer he drags this out the worse its going to look. The Liberal party desperately needs renewal. If this doesn't happen proactively, then BC will have to suffer the consequences of the reactivity. The disaster of another NDP government--the only other alternative.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Meh, this is merely one of the ways senates can deal with legislation. Anyone who has any education in political science would know that this function is absolutely critical to the functioning of this democracy.
Anyone would know that after a bill is passed in parliament, it goes to the senate, where it can in fact be killed, modified, stalled, morphed at the will of the senate, before it is passed back to parliament for 2nd reading.
This is more a reflection of a government that has been in a minority for a long time. More common in our histories have been majorities, who in some cases has to wait more than a decade or two to see the senate turn over so the government has control of parliament and the senate. However, what is interesting is that a government is a government and therefore may choose senators who are friendly to the government--minority or not.
If the Government had been in majority, what would the chances this bill would have made it past 1ST READING? None at all. Considering the games that have been played the past few years on the floor of the senate, this just reminds me of the saying: "What goes around, comes around."
Anyone would know that after a bill is passed in parliament, it goes to the senate, where it can in fact be killed, modified, stalled, morphed at the will of the senate, before it is passed back to parliament for 2nd reading.
This is more a reflection of a government that has been in a minority for a long time. More common in our histories have been majorities, who in some cases has to wait more than a decade or two to see the senate turn over so the government has control of parliament and the senate. However, what is interesting is that a government is a government and therefore may choose senators who are friendly to the government--minority or not.
If the Government had been in majority, what would the chances this bill would have made it past 1ST READING? None at all. Considering the games that have been played the past few years on the floor of the senate, this just reminds me of the saying: "What goes around, comes around."
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Actually Hugh Wood, as painful as this is, according to parliamentary law, the mission extension or new mission is within his discretion, without a vote.
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0006-e.htm#legal
@sistersage: Thankyou. Nothing like stirring people up by leading them along and deceiving them.
Clearly many posters here are deceived, not knowing the facts, the law, the House of Parliament. The things that gall me most is that they are led by authors such as this, who ought to have credible knowledge of the truth. Yet even then are piping a tune the children like to hear. I read these comments quite thoroughly, and it is clear they have their public dancing to the tune like puppets on a string.
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0006-e.htm#legal
@sistersage: Thankyou. Nothing like stirring people up by leading them along and deceiving them.
Clearly many posters here are deceived, not knowing the facts, the law, the House of Parliament. The things that gall me most is that they are led by authors such as this, who ought to have credible knowledge of the truth. Yet even then are piping a tune the children like to hear. I read these comments quite thoroughly, and it is clear they have their public dancing to the tune like puppets on a string.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Editorial: Harper's speech on the new anti-semitism.
Thank you for this editorial. It seems a stark contrast to the madness of the world. Hatred drives a continuum of insanity the extremes of which reflect profound irrationality and prejudice.
I am not a Jew. I am a WASP. I sit and write this on ground a white Colonel cheated from the local 1st nations band over 100 years ago. The glaring reality of the new antisemitism is shown by the relative passions on either topic: Land claims in Palestine, Land claims in BC. One is argued even in this blog intensely, the other tepidly. Some argue both--driven by the same prejudicial hatred.
http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editorial/2010/11/12/16114306.html#/comment/editorial/2010/11/12/pf-16114401.html
I am not a Jew. I am a WASP. I sit and write this on ground a white Colonel cheated from the local 1st nations band over 100 years ago. The glaring reality of the new antisemitism is shown by the relative passions on either topic: Land claims in Palestine, Land claims in BC. One is argued even in this blog intensely, the other tepidly. Some argue both--driven by the same prejudicial hatred.
http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editorial/2010/11/12/16114306.html#/comment/editorial/2010/11/12/pf-16114401.html
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Canada's-Nato Commitment in Afghanistan
I am going to try to say the thing no one wants to say. Today Nato has 150,000 troops in the war, 3,000 are Canadians. After WWII, Canada brought home a million men. In the battle of Vimy Ridge, Canada lost 10,000 troops before noon that day. In Afghanistan we have lost less than 200. Were any of the 10,000 lives any less precious? No the lives of all our soldiers are worth the same: far more than we can properly appreciate.
If Nato had similar numbers, if Canada had a more serious commitment, like that of the 2 major wars, would this have dragged on for 9 years--longer than both world-wars together? Instead I see the pathetic scrambling to commit as few as possible that would still allow us the political brownie points of saying we were doing our part.
It really is pathetic, but with even only 5 million men instead of 150,00. Nato would probably have already pulled out by now, schools would be built where bare ground is now. Infrastructure could stand without fear of being blown up. Pakistan wouldn't dare play footsie with the Nato forces to their north. No, instead we watch the scrabbling back of the free world, their half hearted failure being shifted onto those poor countries who didn't get out before we did.
The world would have been a different place. And this in no way depreciates or diminishes the heart of our soldiers on the ground right now. All I am saying is what could be done with 366 times more?
If Nato had similar numbers, if Canada had a more serious commitment, like that of the 2 major wars, would this have dragged on for 9 years--longer than both world-wars together? Instead I see the pathetic scrambling to commit as few as possible that would still allow us the political brownie points of saying we were doing our part.
It really is pathetic, but with even only 5 million men instead of 150,00. Nato would probably have already pulled out by now, schools would be built where bare ground is now. Infrastructure could stand without fear of being blown up. Pakistan wouldn't dare play footsie with the Nato forces to their north. No, instead we watch the scrabbling back of the free world, their half hearted failure being shifted onto those poor countries who didn't get out before we did.
The world would have been a different place. And this in no way depreciates or diminishes the heart of our soldiers on the ground right now. All I am saying is what could be done with 366 times more?
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Re: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/lest-we-forget-just-10-mps-have-military-experience/article1795706/comments/
The insinuation the Minister of Defense is/was a general's lacky is so crass it raises the integrity and reputation of this rag to new lows. Considering the quality of the military is at a high not seen since the 1950s due in part to Mr. Hillier and Mr. McKay--and not a little bit. What possibly could the motive of the "Notebook" be? A reversal of that current trend or just slagging at the reputation of these two men? I suppose anything goes in politics at the hand of the chattering classes.
Unfortunately what seems to have been a good issue to raise--the utility of military experience in government--was only a ruse, a cover for this slagging piece.
@JC35: Unlike the US, Canadian Prime-ministers tend not to have had military experience. Can one suppose from this that the problem of the disastrous deterioration of Canada's Military over the past 75 years is the lack of military experience on the hill? If it hadn't been for McKay and Hillier I may have agreed given the trend until then.
Unfortunately what seems to have been a good issue to raise--the utility of military experience in government--was only a ruse, a cover for this slagging piece.
@JC35: Unlike the US, Canadian Prime-ministers tend not to have had military experience. Can one suppose from this that the problem of the disastrous deterioration of Canada's Military over the past 75 years is the lack of military experience on the hill? If it hadn't been for McKay and Hillier I may have agreed given the trend until then.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Racism or Anti-Zionism
The problem is that the evil lies in what people think-and their motive. These are intangibles.
So if you have a prejudicial hatred to a certain group of people, the motive will engender behaviors that are inevitably unacceptable. These behaviors can be viewed on a continuum from barely detectable to the horror of holocaust. The latter of course is relatively easy to see, but much hatred can be cloaked, it can be the reason to bring up anti-zionist sentiment for example. Zionism may need to be critiqued, not so much by people who hate Jews which in turn is really *why* they are anti-zionist. The problem is how does one ascertain motive? Sometimes it is easy to see, other times it is carefully hidden behind our intellectual dishonesty.
So if you have a prejudicial hatred to a certain group of people, the motive will engender behaviors that are inevitably unacceptable. These behaviors can be viewed on a continuum from barely detectable to the horror of holocaust. The latter of course is relatively easy to see, but much hatred can be cloaked, it can be the reason to bring up anti-zionist sentiment for example. Zionism may need to be critiqued, not so much by people who hate Jews which in turn is really *why* they are anti-zionist. The problem is how does one ascertain motive? Sometimes it is easy to see, other times it is carefully hidden behind our intellectual dishonesty.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Campbell resigns
The province was run into the ground at the hands of the NDP. It was a basket case when the Libs took over.
How quickly we forget. When the NDP were in power, we couldn't get our highways clean. Their friend in their back pocket was pocketing millions while simply refusing to do their job. The winter after the Libs got in the highways were bare in the Kootenays. The following summer, hundreds of miles of highways and 2ndary roads in profound neglect were paved.
Bureaucracy was blown out the door. Consequently civil servants served the people instead of maintaining their fiefdom, and adding more regulatory burden on us all.
No, its good he resigned, so the dust can settle and objective evaluation of the many things he did accomplish can be revealed for posterity.
How quickly we forget. When the NDP were in power, we couldn't get our highways clean. Their friend in their back pocket was pocketing millions while simply refusing to do their job. The winter after the Libs got in the highways were bare in the Kootenays. The following summer, hundreds of miles of highways and 2ndary roads in profound neglect were paved.
Bureaucracy was blown out the door. Consequently civil servants served the people instead of maintaining their fiefdom, and adding more regulatory burden on us all.
No, its good he resigned, so the dust can settle and objective evaluation of the many things he did accomplish can be revealed for posterity.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
The Galileo Connection
http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/Ted_Hildebrandt/OTeSources/01-Genesis/Text/Articles-Books/Hummel_Gen1_JASA.htm
Recent wargames with Canada's CF-18s and US F-22s and 35s, resulted in the Canadians being entirely wiped out. Not only did we not make a kill, we never even saw them.
10 years ago, the story was different. There is nothing wrong with out pilot's skills. Its what sort of plane we put them in. Even super hornets are not Gen 5. They would be toast in battle with gen 5s. To go any other way is to throw their lives away, because we were too cheap.
10 years ago, the story was different. There is nothing wrong with out pilot's skills. Its what sort of plane we put them in. Even super hornets are not Gen 5. They would be toast in battle with gen 5s. To go any other way is to throw their lives away, because we were too cheap.
Monday, November 1, 2010
F-35 argument tightened up.
What a pile of poo. There is no other gen 5 plane in the world. What will compete with it? The Russians have 2 they "claim" in the same class, and that is dubious, but if they did we could not buy it anyhow. So this competitive bid nonsense is so disingenuous I can't believe Ignatieff is saying it with a straight face. Military procurement is hard to do and easy to have cost over-runs with. I don't know the helicopter modifications Canada ordered that put off delivery 5 years, but this is typical especially for competitive bids. For example, consider how quickly options add up in the price of a new car. The dealership is competing for your business with every other dealership in town, and sometimes province. So to get you to sign on the dotted line the price lure is extraordinarily low. They make their money not selling you the car, but rather on the accessories and extended warranties. It looks like Boeing patted us down by increasing the price of those choppers by more that 70%. I think a review of those costs ARE in order.
However, the f-35 is our plane, never since the Arrow have we had an opportunity like this.
Yes the Arrow program was expensive in its day. Canada would buy them, but on the global scale, we were head to head with the US for sales. This is the first supersonic plane since then that we actually had a hand in building. Over 100 Canadian companies have earned Canada 1/2 a billion dollars, compared to the 380 million of "investment".
The 14-16b number includes maintenance for 30 years for pity sake. Do you think maintenance was added to the sticker price of our CF-18s? Give me a break! Canada just ponied up for over a 1/2 billion for maintenance on those old girls until our new planes can be delivered. So lets be clear, the EXAGGERATED number--inflated by the ministry of defense to allow for cost over-runs was 8.9 billion.
However, LHM has gone on record that it thinks it will spend 12 billion dollars in Canada.
What you say? 8.9 purchase price but we get 12 back. Ah yeah there are 3000 of these planes we will be supplying parts for! We are freaking being given these planes. We are being refunded more than we are paying for them!
Just give this a whiff, that horse pucky you smell is the spin-doctors and politicians who know all of this but think the Canadian public is too stupid to do the math & catch on.
Come on Canada, give this a real good sniff. Iggy is looking down his nose at these ignorant unwashed Canadians, thinking he can get away with murder!
However, the f-35 is our plane, never since the Arrow have we had an opportunity like this.
Yes the Arrow program was expensive in its day. Canada would buy them, but on the global scale, we were head to head with the US for sales. This is the first supersonic plane since then that we actually had a hand in building. Over 100 Canadian companies have earned Canada 1/2 a billion dollars, compared to the 380 million of "investment".
The 14-16b number includes maintenance for 30 years for pity sake. Do you think maintenance was added to the sticker price of our CF-18s? Give me a break! Canada just ponied up for over a 1/2 billion for maintenance on those old girls until our new planes can be delivered. So lets be clear, the EXAGGERATED number--inflated by the ministry of defense to allow for cost over-runs was 8.9 billion.
However, LHM has gone on record that it thinks it will spend 12 billion dollars in Canada.
What you say? 8.9 purchase price but we get 12 back. Ah yeah there are 3000 of these planes we will be supplying parts for! We are freaking being given these planes. We are being refunded more than we are paying for them!
Just give this a whiff, that horse pucky you smell is the spin-doctors and politicians who know all of this but think the Canadian public is too stupid to do the math & catch on.
Come on Canada, give this a real good sniff. Iggy is looking down his nose at these ignorant unwashed Canadians, thinking he can get away with murder!
Will the Feds allow the BHP Potash deal to go through?
If the myth of right & left wings exists and apparently it does in some form or other, Canada's right wing rests somewhat left of center. It exists "left" of center because they still believe in universal access to medical services, public schools, libraries, & protection. The afore mentioned are all social services, and while the right might want to tweak some of those services, they are still going to remain as Canada's social (products of the left wing) services.
I think this deal will be stopped. There is mounting expectation in the Canadian populous to see this quashed. The government needs to regain traction with the popular vote. There will be criticism from the far right no doubt. The government doesn't like to let that faction down, but the political necessity will demand they do it. The crux of it is, who else will the right vote for? Certainly not the Liberals who object to lower corporate taxes, nor the NDP for similar reasons.
Therefore, the conservatives really lose nothing--but gain a big chunk of the more leftward leaning voter. They won't win the far left in any event. But the prize of the centre is worth the price.
I think this deal will be stopped. There is mounting expectation in the Canadian populous to see this quashed. The government needs to regain traction with the popular vote. There will be criticism from the far right no doubt. The government doesn't like to let that faction down, but the political necessity will demand they do it. The crux of it is, who else will the right vote for? Certainly not the Liberals who object to lower corporate taxes, nor the NDP for similar reasons.
Therefore, the conservatives really lose nothing--but gain a big chunk of the more leftward leaning voter. They won't win the far left in any event. But the prize of the centre is worth the price.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)