Canadian government to fall

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


You poor small countries just can't think in the right orders of magnitude

Well considering Canada is definitely larger and arguably richer , I'm not sure what to make of your comments

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Max Webster


Its not possible. He will have talk about it sooner or later. The media, the other partys, the people of Canada will all want to know where he stands on these things.

Anyone that doesn't know ahd their head in the sand. All I am saying is that focussing on other issues would be better politically

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Max Webster


Canada is hell of alot bigger than the US.

Slightly biggers, in terms of land area. Canada has 9.9M square kilometres, versus the US's 9.6M.

But here's a little bit of advice: the US has absolutely nothing to do with this election. You're going to have to place your xenophobia aside for a few weeks.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Max Webster
I bet they are trying please the socially conservative group because there are more of them. More votes, but i don't think enought to win an election. When they do this they alienate people like asher.

Thats why I say downplay the issue. A strong social conservative will know that the Conservatives are the party most aligned with them. Its obvious, we ALL know it.

So yes you can talk about it a bit somewhere along the way , but the manner in which the media portrayed this, its like gay marriage is a HUGE issue for the Conservatives and I just don't think it is. A significant number of their members would likely vote against Harper in a truly free vote . . . Isn't that thepoint harper can emphasize?? The fact that he allows a free vote on such issues and that Conservative MPS are totally free to disagree with him??

[Max Webster]

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn
the US has absolutely nothing to do with this election.

Originally posted by notyoueither
Martin already caved to the Yanks and shelved that bill.

.. then NYE is full of it, according to you.

[Ben Kenobi]

Or have you just not noticed the record deficts they are recording. Their taxes are low at the cost of building a horrific debt

A debt proportionally lower then our own. We have high taxes and a higher debt.

[Max Webster]

Originally posted by Flubber
So yes you can talk about it a bit somewhere along the way , but the manner in which the media portrayed this, its like gay marriage is a HUGE issue for the Conservatives and I just don't think it is. A significant number of their members would likely vote against Harper in a truly free vote . . . Isn't that thepoint harper can emphasize?? The fact that he allows a free vote on such issues and that Conservative MPS are totally free to disagree with him??

Thats what he can say at election time and your right it would probably work. And possibly win them this election. But down the road, maybe next election people like asher will wisen up and say why should vote for the conservatives this time around when they axed all my values after the last election.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Flubber


Anyone that doesn't know ahd their head in the sand. All I am saying is that focussing on other issues would be better politically

The media wouldn't let him. Especially not during a 56 day campaign. If he didn't answer, they would go off digging, asking individual candidates (like Randy White) about the subject until they get their gold.

I would imagine this was orchestrated by the party. I would hope that all candidates have been asked to say that the leader has already spoken on this issue for this campaign. If that is what happens, it is far better than the media weighing each candidate individually to find the ones that are lighter than a duck and dribbling out reports from their witch hunt all along the campaign trail.

[Ben Kenobi]

I cannot believe how monumentally stupid Harper can be. The main election story today is about how Harper will try to repeal gay marriage.

You need to read what he actually said and not the inflammatory headline. Harper promised some very significant things. First of all, he promised to have a free vote in parliament, including his cabinet, something that the vaunted liberal government was unwilling to do, even given the nature of a the issue. Even if you support gay marraige, then surely you also support the right of parliament to hold a free vote on the issue. However, I strongly suspect that those who support gay marriage, don't believe that there should be any such thing as a free vote, since that means they might lose.

Secondly, he promised that those who have been married, will retain their certificates. No rolling back the clock. I don't see how anyone who believes in a democracy that represents the will of the people should oppose either move by Harper.

[Max Webster]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
A debt proportionally lower then our own. We have high taxes and a higher debt.

And i'm oversimplying things

[Ben Kenobi]

BS they make more money than we do.

Sure they do. And if you are fortunate to live in Texas your costs of living are substantially lower then in the big cities of Canada.

http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/000728/d000728a.htm

Average earnings higher in the United States
In 1997, American workers averaged about $36,500 in earnings (expressed in 1995 Canadian dollars using purchasing power parities), 29.2% more than the Canadian average of $28,300. These workers included both men and women, employed both full-time and part-time, and employees as well as the self-employed.

These 1997 averages followed increases of 14.6% in the United States between 1985 and 1997 and 5.9% in Canada.

The differences in earnings between the two countries was largest for workers at the top of the earnings distribution. The difference at the median - the middle point at which half the population has higher earnings and half lower - was smaller (13.6%). The median earnings of American workers were $27,500 in 1997, compared with $24,200 in Canada.

[Ben Kenobi]

I support both those things, and I consider myself a social conservative

Interesting. Why do you feel this way jon? Have you met anyone who opposes these things before?

[Jon Miller]

I know a lot of people who oppose gay marriage and the legalisation of marijuana.

While I am not pro drug use, or marijuana use, the effort the governent goes to restrict pot use when other, harder, worse drugs are allowed for medical/other use is just rediculous. Pot is about as bad as acohol, not so bad in limited ammounts, can be a problem though. This isn't a very strong position of mine.

I am pro gay marriage because I am pro family values. By not allowing portions of the population to take part in the family structure, we push them outside of the family, and weaken family values as a whole. It would be a lot better, for society, and for the people forced out, if they could be allowed to form families, and have support for long term stable relationships. This is a much stronger position of mine.

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

I am a social conservative because I think that society should support families. And because I am antiabortion (Where abortion is defined as after brainwaves are observed in the child).

JM
(although I would be completely fine with not allowing abortion at any time.. better to not murder and to limit freedom, then to allow freedom but murder)

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


A debt proportionally lower then our own. We have high taxes and a higher debt.

Do you have those proportional numbers at hand?

All I know is that currently Canada runs surpluses and are slowly paying down the debt. Last time I checked we had GDP geowth greater than the States IIRC . Contrast this with record deficits in the US.

Looking at total debt gives you a picture of a country from the beginning of time and doesn't necessarily give you much of a picture of the current economic health

Also, a LOT of debt was incurred during the Mulroney years