Canadian Politics

1…3536384041…80

Comments

  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    ^^^^ Do you mean that's more so the case in BC? Probably just the weed.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    ^^^^
    Probably.
    Though it does not change the fact that BC is becoming too liberal thinking.

  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    If you mean we've had too much of the provincial Liberals I'd definitely agree with you.

    I suspect that's not what you mean.

    BC has been pretty liberal for decades.
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    ^^^^
    Yes that is true that BC has been liberal for decades.
    But only on the provincial level.

    BC -The too-liberal thinking(youth) provincial gov't and because of their way has now become a grandstanding province that is controlled by anything but.
  • 1ThoughtKnown
    1ThoughtKnown Posts: 6,155
    edited June 2015
    The point is, a perfect ideology is socially liberal and fiscally (or economically) conservative. Every
    party in Canada would be "left" in America. There is no "religious right" in Canada with any political clout which tugs at the tea party faction of the Republican Party.
    They are all "progressive" in nature, while the Tea Party are right wing nut cases.

    The problem is, economics cannot work the way the "far left" in Canada would want you to believe. The free market system cannot sustain itself within a completely socialist or communist system.
    The cracks in the Chinese economy are starting to show, the Soviet system failed. Sweden failed.
    Our freedoms are enjoyed because of this capitalist system, you can work harder and take more risks and be rewarded. You can take the safe route and live really comfortably.

    Canada has the most successful balance of socialism and capitalism the world has ever seen.
    Health Care for everyone. A social safety net as good as anywhere. The ability to gain wealth.
    The joy of living in a safe country.

    We must be careful how "liberal" we are economically, it threatens our freedoms.
    Post edited by 1ThoughtKnown on
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    1ThoughtKnown said:

    The point is, a perfect ideology is socially liberal and fiscally (or economically) conservative. Every
    party in Canada would be "left" in America. There is no "religious right" in Canada with any political clout which tugs at the tea party faction of the Republican Party.
    They are all "progressive" in nature, while the Tea Party are right wing nut cases.

    The problem is, economics cannot work the way the "far left" in Canada would want you to believe. The free market system cannot sustain itself within a completely socialist or communist system.
    The cracks in the Chinese economy are starting to show, the Soviet system failed. Sweden failed.
    Our freedoms are enjoyed because of this capitalist system, you can work harder and take more risks and be rewarded. You can take the safe route and live really comfortably.

    Canada has the most successful balance of socialism and capitalism the world has ever seen.
    Health Care for everyone. A social safety net as good as anywhere. The ability to gain wealth.
    The joy of living in a safe country.

    We must be careful how "liberal" we are economically, it threatens our freedoms.

    Another person who doesn't understand what the "tea party" even is. What you just described as your economic stance is what the "tea party" believes. You are the same and you are not a "right wing nutcase". The tea party and social conservatives are two different circles in the conservative Venn diagram. Some members over lap but not all do. For example Mike Huckabee is a social conservative but not a tea party conservative. It drives me nuts how many fiscally conservative Canadians don't understand the difference. Pay attention people!
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model
  • 1ThoughtKnown
    1ThoughtKnown Posts: 6,155
    I don't really have to pay "close attention" to American politics. I live in Canada. But, you obviously missed my point, I am socially liberal, not conservative. I am not in line with anything Republican on social issues. Especially not Huckabee, Tea Party or not.
    The entire Republican Party is not Tea Party crazy, but that Cruz guy (born in Calgary) is a maniac. The religious right in the US is not a force here in Canada, and the Republicans NEED their votes. Mike Huckabee may be a social conservative but not in the tea party, which is just as bad isn't it?
    Does he support gay marriage? Abortion? Push for change in racial inequality? Fair immigration reform?

    Our "conservative" federal government has admitted to a huge travesty involving First Nations and catholic residential schools, calling It "cultural genocide". I applause them on taking the first step to assist in healing process for our First Nations people. Would the Republicans do that? Would they admit slavery was wrong and publicly admit to the world that American policy screwed up the following generations with slavery? Really, I am asking because you seem to think I know so little....
  • 1ThoughtKnown
    1ThoughtKnown Posts: 6,155
    dignin said:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

    Did you see those tax rates? 51%? That doesn't even count the 25% sales tax in Norway.
    The Nordic system is not as good as Canada's, but I am biased.
    In fact, Norway's former Finance Minister recently said the reason they have a trillion dollars in the bank is because they looked at the model of Alberta, designed by Peter Lougheed's PC government in the 80s.
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    1ThoughtKnown said:

    dignin said:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_model

    Did you see those tax rates? 51%? That doesn't even count the 25% sales tax in Norway.
    The Nordic system is not as good as Canada's, but I am biased.
    In fact, Norway's former Finance Minister recently said the reason they have a trillion dollars in the bank is because they looked at the model of Alberta, designed by Peter Lougheed's PC government in the 80s.

    The model which all proceeding PC governments eroded away. The model which Rachel Notley and the Alberta NDP wants to bring us back to.
  • InHiding80
    InHiding80 Upland,CA Posts: 7,623
    Cruz voted against veteran's benefits so he's chickenhawk scum to me whether he has an R next to his name or not.
  • oftenreading
    oftenreading Victoria, BC Posts: 12,856
    InHiding80 said:

    Cruz voted against veteran's benefits so he's chickenhawk scum to me whether he has an R next to his name or not.

    Hey, don't you be bringing your American politics into our cozy little Canadian enclave! Even if he was born here, we have a no return policy on Republicans. :smiley:
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • 1ThoughtKnown
    1ThoughtKnown Posts: 6,155
    ^^^^^^

    Eroded away hey. So you are saying we had Nordic style socialism in 1971?
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    1ThoughtKnown said:

    ^^^^^^

    Eroded away hey. So you are saying we had Nordic style socialism in 1971?

    "Norway's former Finance Minister recently said the reason they have a trillion dollars in the bank is because they looked at the model of Alberta, designed by Peter Lougheed's PC government in the 80s. "


    Your own words
  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    edited June 2015
    Bold and extremely pretentious statements coming from our PM today.
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-commits-to-ending-fossil-fuel-use-by-2100/article24844340/
    We have now pledged along with the other G7 countries to end the use of fossil fuels by 2100. Pretty good politicking considering an election is right around the corner.
    He has just made all the environmentalists happy by doing nothing except using words.
    Along with pledging to limiting the increase in global temperature to less than 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.
    I don't know who is crazier the global warming environmentalists who live in lala land or country leaders who believe that this can be done. Limit the global temperature increase to 2degrees-that's swell, thanks so much guys, appreciate it.

    Save the planet! Vote Harper! - in 85 years you won't even recognize this earth.



    Post edited by PJfanwillneverleave1 on
  • 1ThoughtKnown
    1ThoughtKnown Posts: 6,155
    edited June 2015
    Lougheed was a PC. How could he erode it away if he created it?

    Do you really think the NDP will save money? :lol:


    Post edited by 1ThoughtKnown on
  • 1ThoughtKnown
    1ThoughtKnown Posts: 6,155
    PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

    Bold and extremely pretentious statements coming from our PM today.
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-commits-to-ending-fossil-fuel-use-by-2100/article24844340/
    We have now pledged along with the other G7 countries to end the use of fossil fuels by 2100. Pretty good politicking considering an election is right around the corner.
    He has just made all the environmentalists happy by doing nothing except using words.
    Along with pledging to limiting the increase in global temperature to less than 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.
    I don't know who is crazier the global warming environmentalists who live in lala land or country leaders who believe that this can be done. Limit the global temperature increase to 2degrees-that's swell, thanks so much guys, appreciate it.

    Save the planet! Vote Harper! - in 85 years you won't even recognize this earth.



    Lol in 85 years he (and the other 6) will be dust and when these campaign promises are not fulfilled, so what. This means nothing.
  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    ^^^^^^
    I know.
    That is what I'm saying. It's just words from talking heads.
    But those words could get the PCs elected again because those words have just made every green activist happier today.
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    1ThoughtKnown said:

    I don't really have to pay "close attention" to American politics. I live in Canada. But, you obviously missed my point, I am socially liberal, not conservative. I am not in line with anything Republican on social issues. Especially not Huckabee, Tea Party or not.
    The entire Republican Party is not Tea Party crazy, but that Cruz guy (born in Calgary) is a maniac. The religious right in the US is not a force here in Canada, and the Republicans NEED their votes. Mike Huckabee may be a social conservative but not in the tea party, which is just as bad isn't it?
    Does he support gay marriage? Abortion? Push for change in racial inequality? Fair immigration reform?

    Our "conservative" federal government has admitted to a huge travesty involving First Nations and catholic residential schools, calling It "cultural genocide". I applause them on taking the first step to assist in healing process for our First Nations people. Would the Republicans do that? Would they admit slavery was wrong and publicly admit to the world that American policy screwed up the following generations with slavery? Really, I am asking because you seem to think I know so little....

    Republicans are the ones who abolished slavery. You should at a bare minimum know that. Coming back to the topic at hand...I am a socially liberal Canadian like you. I am just trying to correct you on what the "tea party" is and isn't. You lumped the tea party in with social conservatism yet they are not the same. The tea party started as a reaction to the spending of George W Bush who is a social conservative. The tea party has nothing to do with social conservativism although there are some social conservatives who are both i.e. Ted Cruz. Tea party conservatism is fiscal conservatism with a strain of populism. It wants minimal government spending and does not want subsidies or regulations that protect big banks or other large corporations from smaller start-ups. It is most concerned with the growth of crony capitalism and on social issues it is far more libertarian. My point is that for you to use the term "Tea Party crazy" does not really make sense when on the economic front you are far more aligned with them then you realize.
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    1ThoughtKnown said:

    Lougheed was a PC. How could he erode it away if he created it?

    Do you really think the NDP will save money? :lol:


    It's like talking to a wall man.

    Go back and read what I said.

This discussion has been closed.

Categories