Dutch01

this feel good legislation and carbon tax is simply a tax grab with save the planet marketing angle.

Dave I'll grant you this, if the money collected is not earmarked for a special fund that can only be used for "green initiatives", then you are correct, it is not a legitimate exercise.

 

I actually don't know if the funds are going to general revenue or not. I'll see what I can find when I have a minute...

You don't turn thousands into hundreds of millions by making everyone happy! As far as ripping people off; I feel I'm getting ripped off every time I get a pay cheque and I look at what our government takes from me.

Cliff, If you have honestly evaluated O'Leary's position on the issues and decided he stands for what you stand for, then vote for him with my blessing (not that you need it, just saying).

I'm sure we're not the only three

 

They aren't running the country right now.

Nice dodge! (Being serious, you sidestepped the question deftly!)

 

Personally Bernier is my current best of the litter in this brood.

I don't know enough about him myself, but he seems to be one of the few serious contenders. There are just too many candidates right now, they need to whittle it down a bit.

Carry on Dutch.

 

Personally, I learn alot from your posts and point of view(whether I agree or disagree)

 

You have a knack for rational debate on various topics and always back it up appropriately and I for one, appreciate the insight and effort put into your posts.

Thanks dude. I'm not sure that's the consensus opinion but I'm not trying to win friends here. Just me being me.

 

I will say I stayed up way too late last night researching the Fraser Institute but I'm glad I did. I'll know to be wary the next time I see them quoted in an article. Just the association with the Koch brothers alone is enough to put me off.

A little less off topic, everyone at the debate seemed to focus on attacking Maxine Bernier. That tells me they saw him as the biggest threat on the stage. I'm sure they'll be attacking O'leary at the next one.

I'm sure I'm rufling feathers here, but to be clear I am not advocating for liberal partisanship, I am arguing against all partisanship.

 

"Joining a tribe", liberal or conservative, rarely leads people to more reasonable and rational thought on issues.

I would say it means he's screwed over a lot of people and been sued on a regular.

 

If getting rich by ripping people off is a guy you want running the country, I can't agree with you there Cliff.

 

Read the article, see what Mattel had to say about him after losing billions dealing with him.

Also, it's almost impossible to win an election without Quebec's seats. Quebec will never vote for someone who doesn't speak French.

 

I know, he's taking lessons. We'll see if QC buys it or not.

Another blowhard in politics!! Just what we all needed!!

Somehow these goons manage to convince the people they fleece that they are their only savour. It's mind boggling. Trump made a career out of not paying working class people for work performed, and somehow they think he cares about "the little guy"'.

Well, I think this just got interesting and Justin is going to have to get down to business or he'll be going back to teaching after the next election. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the same sort of thing that happened in the US, happen here, people are just plane tired of politicians! At least Kevin can talk and he's got a proven track record when it comes to business.

 

 

He's actually not a very good business man at all, he just plays one on tv.

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/kevin-oleary-hes-not-a-billionaire-he-just-plays-one-on-tv/article4564334/

 

Again, I just posted a link to an article with an alternative viewpoint...did I say I agreed with it??? Does our Provincial government give us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?? Maybe reality lies somewhere in between....

Did I say that you said you agreed with it? I did not.

 

You could post a link to bomb making instructions and say but I only posted a link, I didn't say I agreed with it. But you'd still be guilty of spreading dangerous information, or in this case misinformation.

 

Don't take it personal, I'm not attacking you here.

 

I'm amazed how many posters here attack the Liberals (rightly so in many cases) while giving a free pass to anyone conservative.

 

They are not different. They are in competition. They are each trying to screw us better than the other.

I agree that we are not getting all the straight facts from the Liberal govt or the people whose cheques they sign.

An alternative opinion is always welcome

Do you believe you are getting the straight facts from Conservative politicians?

it wouldn't stop climate change.

No, but it would drastically accelerate it (ever heard of nuclear winter?). My point was to show you that your statement was rooted only in believe, not fact.

I don't believe anything man can do will affect climate change.

Belief is not the same as knowledge.

 

Do you believe that if man launched all of the world's nuclear arsenal at one time, there would still be no effect on the climate?

Any crossbow or compound can cause more damage than a pellet gun or 22

Doesn't even have to be a compound. My 45# recurve with a broadhead can cause plenty of damage.

 

I just posted a link to an article.....it's up to the readers to draw their own conclusions.

Fair enough.

 

I thought you might like to know who you are listening to.

An interesting article on the phase out of coal in Ontario and what it has accomplished:

 

http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/2017/01/17/shutdown-of-coal-plants-raised-electricity-rates-failed-to-reduce-pollution-report

Consider the source. I say that in all seriousness, because this article is a propaganda piece.

 

First, it's from the Toronto Sun, a conservative newspaper not known for journalistic quality or integrity.

 

Second, it's reporting on a piece by the Fraser Institute. The following information may help you to understand the Fraser Institute's motivations.

 

Catherine Windels is the Director of International Affairs at international drug giant Pfizer, and also served as the Secretary Treasurer for the Fraser Institutes Board of Trustees. The Fraser Institute has put out several "reports" critical of internet pharmacies and generic drugs, and has lobbied for direct to consumer advertising by drug companies. All things that would benefit Pfizer.

 

Then there's Gwyn Morgan (of oil company EnCana) and R. J. Pirie (Sabre Energy). They are on the board too. Oh and the Koch brothers, those conservative American oil billionaires, they gave $500,000 to the Fraser Institute. Actually Exxon gave them $120,000 too, seems like all the oil guys want to get in bed with Fraser. Perhaps that is why the Fraser Institute are essentially climate change deniers.

 

You may have read recently, as I did, that corporations are sitting on record amounts of cash. Interestingly, the Fraser Institute supports cutting corporate taxes. Perhaps they think the corporations need more cash. I wonder if that has anything to do with board members Peter Brown (Cannacord Capital) and James McGovern (Arrow Hedge Partners). These guys control hedge funds with investments of approximately $300M for the ultra rich.

 

I'm sure there's more, the board is actually huge.

 

I'm not sure why anyone who isn't filthy rich would think the Fraser Institute would ever do anything for them. They don't care about regular people at all. They use big corporate money and a rag like the Sun to convince the "working man" that they've got your back.

 

While I didn't do the research, I'm sure the Liberals are just as bad on the other side. Google Mike Crawley, former President of the Liberal Party of Canada. He started a power company (despite no prior experience) and received a 20 year guaranteed contract to provide green energy to the Ontario Liberals. The payout? A paltry $66,000 per day.

 

The point is these guys have all read Sun Tzu, and as long as they keep us divided into liberal or conservative tribes, we will remain conquered.

I'm not sure there's anything to worry about, at least where Simcoe is concerned. It's been hammered every winter for decades and there's still no shortage of perch.

 

Aliens have perpetuated a giant hoax through mind control of our leading scientists and politicians and only Dara and a hand full of others could envision the enormity of this MASSIVE CONSPIRACY. We have all been BLIND. Only by perpetuating this giant global warming hoax could politicians such as Trudeau get elected and unleash his plan to bankrupt seniors and the average working Joe through the nefarious Hydro One. At that moment when millions of citizens have been bankrupted and effectively neutralized, will the aliens finally lay down their hammer with one giant thud of a global assault initiated out of Area 51. How's that narrative, is it believable?

LOL! Sounds like you have the makings of a screenplay there scuro!

Actually, the truth is that Trudeau's immigration numbers are the same as the previous government, possibly slightly less.

Harper was bringing about 25-30,000 refugees per year with 200,000 immigrants

Basically the same as all of the Lieberal policies adhering to Conservative initiatives including health care transfers to provinces.

 

The only difference is that Trudeau had to do it with a bunch of fan fare and celebration to make himself look like a hero.

The problem is he did it all at once and clogged the system instead of gradually throughout the year so they could be properly taken care of.

 

 

Hey, if you can't show off, whats the point of being Prime Minister

It probably could have been implemented more smoothly, but you're right that the "new" policy is pretty much the same as the "old" policy.

Last time I checked, Ontario is already struggling to meet it's current obligations.

HH

Ontario is struggling because of horrendous mismanagement by the Wynne crime gang, not because of immigrants.

When you say who is paying the cost, you are missing the point. On the whole, immigration returns more to Canada than it costs us.

 

On the flipside, stopping immigration because of an erroneous perception that it costs us money, would actually have the reverse of the intended effect. Canadians are not having enough children to sustain our tax base. Without immigrants' contribution to Canada, the government would have to cut social programs further, or run higher deficits.

I'm sure he would answer, correctly, that study after study has proven immigration provides a net benefit to Canada. Study after study has also shown that without immigration our population would decline at a rate that would not sustain economic growth.

 

This isn't rocket science, people. But it is science. Everybody has their own gut feel about things, but if your gut feel tells you we need to cut back on immigration, then your gut feel runs contrary to the facts.