I eat it and I liked it very much Who ate it? tell meSounds delicious.
Last edited:
I eat it and I liked it very much Who ate it? tell meSounds delicious.
The grass is pink.Thanks for admitting you cherry picked. Finally. It's taken this long to get that out of you.
By the way there was nothing to cherry pick in yours. The only relevant bit was to point out your cherry picking which is what we have been discussing. The rest were ad-hominems that you like to include with every post because you know you don't have a defensible point.
Right on queue...an unrelated post in an effort to distract from your usual failure.This is your logic.
All you do is troll.Right on queue...an unrelated post in an effort to distract from your usual failure.
You need new tricks.
Capitalism drives innovation which leads to prosperity and wealth. hint: that's where taxes come from Comrade.All you do is troll.
What you will not and can never do, is discuss the issues with capitalism.
Says the guy who keeps saying he wants to know HOW Poilievre is going to make Canada better.That is not what he said. That is again, a cherry picking to mischaracterize what he said to spin your own narratives. You seem to be having difficulty with reading comprehension. Trudeau was not trying to tell you HOW he was going to accomplish a balanced budget. That wasn't even the question. He was saying that a balanced budget was less important than taking care of Canadians and added on criticism of conservative methods of artificially balancing budgets by cutting services.
Ah. Tell me you lost the debate without telling me you lost the debate. Skoob's favourite tactic of declaring victories that don't exist when he knows he pwned himself.
Right and socialism is evil you claim.Capitalism drives innovation which leads to prosperity and wealth. hint: that's where taxes come from Comrade.
But we all know you're just someone who thinks he's fooling everyone by calling Communism "socialism" and just feels entitled to everyone else's money.
Says the guy who just wants to take more and more money from people who just happen to have more wealth.Right and socialism is evil you claim.
Even though you refuse to understand its not black and white, that you love some socialism but never want to pay for it.
Police, public roads, public schools, public health care......
None of which you want to pay for.
That's the real issues, you're just a selfish, cheapskate right winger who wants to ride on the goodwill of the rest of us.
You don't even realize when you make a statement that proves my point.Says the guy who just wants to take more and more money from people who just happen to have more wealth.
Funding roads, police, schools, was never an issue in the past compared to now. So that argument fails every time.
The money (and more) is there. Mismanagement of that money and prioritizing stupid pet-projects is the reason why they want more and more. Lazy politicking. They have convinced you that the problem is with the wealthy and the companies that provide jobs. You swallowed that completely.You don't even realize when you make a statement that proves my point.
Funny how giving tax breaks to corporations and the rich means the government has less to spend on services, isn't it?
The reporter asked him how committed he was to balancing the budget and as usual, he started speaking and not making sense because he has no idea what he's talking about if someone else doesn't provide him a script.Yes and if the reporter wanted to know how Trudeau was going to balance the budget, then he should have asked that question, like I asked you how Pee Pee was going to make Canada better - to which neither you, nor Pee Pee seem to have an answer. The reporter in this case did not. So Trudeau was not required to answer a question that was not asked of him.
Pet projects like $650 million for a parking lot for a foreign spa?The money (and more) is there. Mismanagement of that money and prioritizing stupid pet-projects is the reason why they want more and more. Lazy politicking. They have convinced you that the problem is with the wealthy and the companies that provide jobs. You swallowed that completely.
btw Take away all the tax breaks to corporations. Walk me through how much better that would be in your mind. Then convince me you're not a Communist.
I'll wait...
Why would anyone want to live diThat's two from 1992 who are still in holes in the ground without a view.
Who do you think built these shoebox condos? Answer - Private sector developers.
Who do you think bought more than 70% of these shoebox condos? - Investors and speculators
What market segment did these developers build these shoebox condos for? - Investors and speculators, both corporate and mom and pop shops.
Is it really too much to ask for ninnies to use analytical skills to see the connection? - Yes, yes it is.
As if building large lot single family $3milliom McMansions in the Greenbelt and farmers field will help solve the housing affordability crisis.
Investors and speculators have cornered the market for housing and everyone else loses.
Every dollar out of the governments pocket is a win for us peasants. Governments never fail to blow money on dumb shit.Don't forget that dofo waived licence plate renewal fees ..... why? I get that that saves the poor $75 a year but that is just part of the cost of owning a car. But for every million cars we, the people the province, lose $75,000,000 a year. Could that pay for maintaining our infrastructure, could that help our health care, could that have helped maintain the science centre. If there are 10 million cars in Ontario (I don't know), that amounts to 3/4 of a billion dollars. Over 4 years that is 3 billion dollars and counting!
In my opinion, that is without doubt the absolute stupidest thing our infamous provincial PM has done. Why isn't everybody up in arms over it?
Now you're resorting to calling Mr. Poilievre names as well as the other unhinged Leftists on here, lol.Yes and if the reporter wanted to know how Trudeau was going to balance the budget, then he should have asked that question, like I asked you how Pee Pee was going to make Canada better - to which neither you, nor Pee Pee seem to have an answer. The reporter in this case did not. So Trudeau was not required to answer a question that was not asked of him.
As another peasant, I have to ask you, how is that a win for us? Explain yourself.Every dollar out of the governments pocket is a win for us peasants.
That's a funny list which I'll ignore and highlight the one point that explains your whole misleading narrative.Pet projects like $650 million for a parking lot for a foreign spa?
Like billions for the 417?
Like $1 million for a business plan?
Like $1 billion to cancel contracts and put beer in corner stores?
Like $2 billion in lost revenue to cut out the LCBO?
Like how many billions for badly managed Metrolinx projects?
Like $8 billion for the Greenbelt scandal?
Like $200 million for cancelled renewable contracts they are now redoing?
You think that's why we can't afford health care, education and social services?
You might have a point.
First off, it was $120 per year. (if you owned a car in the province you would know that)Don't forget that dofo waived licence plate renewal fees ..... why? I get that that saves the poor $75 a year but that is just part of the cost of owning a car. But for every million cars we, the people the province, lose $75,000,000 a year. Could that pay for maintaining our infrastructure, could that help our health care, could that have helped maintain the science centre. If there are 10 million cars in Ontario (I don't know), that amounts to 3/4 of a billion dollars. Over 4 years that is 3 billion dollars and counting!
In my opinion, that is without doubt the absolute stupidest thing our infamous provincial PM has done. Why isn't everybody up in arms over it?
It's funny watching Trudeau supporters bend over backwards defending his stupidity.There you go. The reporter asked him how committed he was to balancing the budget. Not how he was going to balance the budget. 2 very different questions. So he answered that his commitment is to the people first. And he is right. The economy is the people. Not numbers. The numbers are a result of people producing things. This is also why with an increase in population the GDP goes up.
So in sum, he answered the question he was asked. He was not asked how he was going to accomplish this and had he been asked and had he launched into a PP style diatribe, then you'd have a point. In this case you are simply cherry picking and mischaracterizing his response.
That's a stupid reply which I will ignore.That's a funny list which I'll ignore