What about the farking Trudeau did to us in the '70s? What about the uncalled for election in '79? We are paying for it everyday, so why not place blame where blame is due.clubber said:
Harper's cabinet two step
- Thread starter Never Compromised
- Start date
Keeping us out of Kyoto bad thinglookingforitallthetime said:
Resolving along trade dispute, if you are talking soft wood lumber it is still not ratified, and it is a deal our Soft Wood Lumber guys don't like. The Free Trade deal should of resolved this. What he had done has opened the door to ending the Free Trade deal. We are now everytime the US does not like something have to renegotiate, and with a Republican butt boy as Prime Minister we will get screwed all the time.
Do you really think Legislation of any type is going to reduce corruption in government. The one the Liberals had before the house based on the Gomeri stuff was actually considered to be stronger. Harper himself admits the NDP added alot that makes his more effective. In the end regardless they will find ways around it. They always do.
Now what have they really done. Tax reform for giving our hard earned money to the big companies. Started our economy back to the failed ideals of the Trickle Down, or supply side economic ideas. This is a disaster waiting to happen. The economy is the single most important thing for any Government.
That is the problem I have right there... Just because someone is "rich" should not mean they are entitled to any better care. A persons wealth does not make them any better or worse than another.Neverenuff$ said:
Quest4Less said:
I agree but...
The top tier of a two tier system could subsidize and improve the lower tier ,
sure the "rich" may get the best care but the rest of us would end up with "better" care ...
the way it is now.. no one is getting good health services ... I'd be happy with "better" care than we get now...
clubber said:
Actually the environment is the most important thing ..... remember its the Liberals pending disaster du jour and only the Libs can save us ...
Sorta what started this thread..
Neverenuff$ said:Actually the environment is the most important thing ..... remember its the Liberals pending disaster du jour and only the Libs can save us ...
Sorta what started this thread..
Right you are, if we can't breath we die. The thread is about the Harper cabinet shuffle. I don't like or trust Harper, but he is elected, and deserves a chance. The first attempt was a failure at a plan is a failure. The suffle is like he is almost admitting it. A new minister. Another chance, and hopefully he will come up with something that will work. As much as I don't like Harper I also think we need to give him the chance to prove himself, or not. The government should have atleast another year or two. The NDP and Liberals should also bring support enough so he does not have to go to the Bloc Party for support.
LMFAO You are quite the card. Can you make up your mind, or do you have to go outside turn around and come back in?clubber said:
If your analysis is so correct, why don't you run for leader of your party? You bash Harper, then say give him a chance. As long as I've followed politics, every Premier and PM (except Joe Who) has made a cabinet shuffle, so why is it so strange that Harper has made one.I think when he put people in each Ministry, he was looking at his strongest players, some he hasn't worked with before. He wanted representation from Alberta, he wanted representation from women, and maybe being "the critic" is a lot different than being a Minister. You may be an MPP, or MP, but being the official opposition or even the "third" party, is different than being in the ruling party. We don't know what went on behind closed doors, and what she's been told to do. You have to remember that we have a change in government here, and a change in direction. Nothing is the same as before, and now that Harper is running the country, he's hearing lobbyists speak out more, and coincidentaly the weather has been changing faster than other years. Just like the Provincial Conservatives got railroaded over SARS, the Blackout, West Nile, some things are out of his control. Like it or not.
Without seeing what we've seen playout leading up to the shuffle, I'd have said that the Lieberals signed us up for something they couldn't deliver on. It could have been very fiscally irresponsible, to give away billions of dollars to the UN, and put a undue burden on Canadians regardless of where they live or their financial health.
The Kyoto Protocol, which you consider a good thing, is focused on climate change and reducing CO2.clubber said:
CO2 is non toxic and will not affect your breathing. Although I agree we should be concerned about toxins in the air we breath, don't look to Kyoto for help.
Exactly.pussylicker said:
We both know the Liberals signed on to Kyoto because it is what most Canadians want. Liberal policies are formatted from opinion polls and delivered by rhetoric.
That's not the way I remember it.bbking said:
I admit my memory is not what it used to be and therefore can not refute your claim. Can you prove it?
My only hope is we don't get to find out Dion's approachbbking said:
I say give democracy a chance. I would of prefered it if they had of let Maritn's government a chance, but they did not. I don't think Harper will deliver, but I am willing to give him a chance. What is so hard for you to understand about that. I do not have the outright hatred in me that you do perhaps. Perhaps I have just seen more governments come and go, and Canada is still around strong as ever.pussylicker said:LMFAO You are quite the card. Can you make up your mind, or do you have to go outside turn around and come back in?
I think when he put people in each Ministry, he was looking at his strongest players, some he hasn't worked with before. He wanted representation from Alberta, he wanted representation from women, and maybe being "the critic" is a lot different than being a Minister. You may be an MPP, or MP, but being the official opposition or even the "third" party, is different than being in the ruling party. We don't know what went on behind closed doors, and what she's been told to do. You have to remember that we have a change in government here, and a change in direction. Nothing is the same as before, and now that Harper is running the country, he's hearing lobbyists speak out more, and coincidentaly the weather has been changing faster than other years. Just like the Provincial Conservatives got railroaded over SARS, the Blackout, West Nile, some things are out of his control. Like it or not.
Without seeing what we've seen playout leading up to the shuffle, I'd have said that the Lieberals signed us up for something they couldn't deliver on. It could have been very fiscally irresponsible, to give away billions of dollars to the UN, and put a undue burden on Canadians regardless of where they live or their financial health.
Every government does indeed shuffle their cabinet a few times if they are in power long enough. Harper went in with a lot of unknowns, but his Clean Air act was a complete disaster for his government. He had to do something. Baird is the Minster who seems to have gotten the most respect so far. It is a good political move. Good politics and good policies do not always go hand in hand.
You say give democracy a chance, but under Martin, we would still be seeing increasing levels of CO2, while they padded their pockets, sent money abroad, and killed our economy. Stephanie Dion can say what he wants, because until the first election after he would become PM, we have no control over what he does, and then it will be too late. He won't deliver on his sowshall justiss, or his strong eekonomee, or his reduckshun in greenowz gazess, while people still get sicker, and die from what they are breathing.clubber said:
I don't know what Harper can deliver. He is getting hijacked now by a bunch of tree huggers. He proposed the Clean Air Act, that in my eyes was something positive, but Layton wants his sh!t to happen first before they worry about the actual carcinogens that are killing people. I don't see how CO2 can cause asthma, but breathing in sulphur, benzene and a hundred other chemicals, isn't making people healthier. Reducing CO2s instead of eliminating the other sh!t isn't really going to lower the burden on the health care system.
Looking made a good point, "The Kyoto Protocol, which you consider a good thing, is focused on climate change and reducing CO2.
CO2 is non toxic and will not affect your breathing. Although I agree we should be concerned about toxins in the air we breath, don't look to Kyoto for help." On that note, I would add that humidity makes breathing harder regardless of high CO2s or not. Just sit in a sauna. Can you blame humidity directly on CO2? NO
The Lieberals can promise what they want, but they have never been a responsable governing party, as they are a bunch of pocket picking bleeding hearts.
We shall have to see what Harper will finally deliver. His Clean Air is considered a joke by most people. It didn't do anything till 2050. The Tree Huggers have less influence than the Oil Interest groups.
Still when you look at the some of what private business is doing I think they might lead the way. Some of their new electric cars are something else. They have other types of that could use different fuel sources. Still they are a way off. First we need the people to keep interested and be ready to buy. Then again with electric is how we generate it. It would be good for Canada to jump on the 'Green Technology' and try to be one of the leaders. It will be worth alot in the future.
Enviroment is more than just global warming. In the 80's it seemed all about acid rain. Our biggest problem is the earth's human population and the strain it is putting on the enviroment.
I don't know if you get it where you are but in this area we have so many days of air quality warnings every summer. It kills thousands every year. It is short sighted of all our governments that has led us this far in global warming, and will keep us in enviromental problems even if when we do manage to solve the climate change.
Still when you look at the some of what private business is doing I think they might lead the way. Some of their new electric cars are something else. They have other types of that could use different fuel sources. Still they are a way off. First we need the people to keep interested and be ready to buy. Then again with electric is how we generate it. It would be good for Canada to jump on the 'Green Technology' and try to be one of the leaders. It will be worth alot in the future.
Enviroment is more than just global warming. In the 80's it seemed all about acid rain. Our biggest problem is the earth's human population and the strain it is putting on the enviroment.
I don't know if you get it where you are but in this area we have so many days of air quality warnings every summer. It kills thousands every year. It is short sighted of all our governments that has led us this far in global warming, and will keep us in enviromental problems even if when we do manage to solve the climate change.
It is a common belief that Harper's Clean Air Act does nothing until 2050, but this is simply not true. In fact, Harper's plan calls for the reduction of greenhouse gasses by 50% BY 2050. It also involves regulating smog levels by 2010, the implementation of transit credits designed to reduce greenhouse gasses from vehicle emissions along with demanding a committment from the auto industry to reduce these emissions by 5 megatons by the year 2010.clubber said:
Over the next 4 years, the Harper government plans to consult with industry and the provinces to set short and long term goals for smog reduction.
It may seem to you (and many others) that the Clean Air Act is a joke, but I maintain it's a good start. It is certainly more proactive than anything the previous Liberal governments have ever attempted, let alone accomplished.
And just why do you think that Harper has suddenly seen the light and become green? You think that somehow, he has had a total rethink of his support for the Alberta oil patch because he suddenly views it as evil? Or do you think that maybe, just maybe, he is shifting priorities because of the way the prevailing wind is blowing?lookingforitallthetime said:
OK, I'm not here to say CO2s shouldn't be reduced, but society needs to wake the FARK up and look at the BIG PICTURE. Harper's CLEAN AIR ACT goes into areas that the Lieberals haven't thought of. It's not just about CO2s.
Buying a Hybrid isn't really going to solve the problem. I've said it before that nobody has looked at the cost of batteries that need replacing sooner with the colder climate. Then there is a recyling issue. GM's VOLT looks good on paper, but where is the energy coming from to recharge the car after every 60 kms? Canadian Trash can't guarantee their little batteries. They started selling Eliminator batteries with a lifetime warranty, and when they found out they didn't last, put a cap on it. First they prorated them for 8 years, and now 9.
We need to quit buying SH!T. Demand efficiency and longevity. Demand products from "GREEN" or the "GREENEST" companies. Demand that refrigerators and all appliances last more than five years, and that autos last more than 5 years, and TVs, computers and other electronic devices last more than five years. Our mindset is FARKED. Why do we get brainwashed into keeping up with the Jones, or just NEED to have the latest Ipod? TOOOOOOO much of what we buy is disposable. We need to shift paradigms.
Recycling works to a point, then it starts to cost money to recoup materials. So ask for a "GREENER" product. Mixed materials cost more to recycle. Mxed steel is not as good as clean steel. Brake drums and rotors are easier to recycle than engine blocks. How much aluminum or other metals get thrown out? How much glass or plastics? Auto recycling is great, or can be great when it's simply metal and glass. All the other materials added, start to contaminate the recycling process, and as industry works to recycle, they also now create harmful emissions. Glass recycling is perfect when it's clear glass, and then they start to throw out contaminated and coloured glass. Some platics have several lifespans, while others are useless.
Then as Looking has eluded to, there are other things in the air that are harmful, which need to be reduced, so let Harper do his thing. Your lungs may live to like it. Greening the air starts with greening our lifestyles. But and a big BUT, buying cheap sh!t from China isn't going to resolve the problem either. Buy GREEN, use your green to show you mean business, and demand the change from places you make your purchases.
Buying a Hybrid isn't really going to solve the problem. I've said it before that nobody has looked at the cost of batteries that need replacing sooner with the colder climate. Then there is a recyling issue. GM's VOLT looks good on paper, but where is the energy coming from to recharge the car after every 60 kms? Canadian Trash can't guarantee their little batteries. They started selling Eliminator batteries with a lifetime warranty, and when they found out they didn't last, put a cap on it. First they prorated them for 8 years, and now 9.
We need to quit buying SH!T. Demand efficiency and longevity. Demand products from "GREEN" or the "GREENEST" companies. Demand that refrigerators and all appliances last more than five years, and that autos last more than 5 years, and TVs, computers and other electronic devices last more than five years. Our mindset is FARKED. Why do we get brainwashed into keeping up with the Jones, or just NEED to have the latest Ipod? TOOOOOOO much of what we buy is disposable. We need to shift paradigms.
Recycling works to a point, then it starts to cost money to recoup materials. So ask for a "GREENER" product. Mixed materials cost more to recycle. Mxed steel is not as good as clean steel. Brake drums and rotors are easier to recycle than engine blocks. How much aluminum or other metals get thrown out? How much glass or plastics? Auto recycling is great, or can be great when it's simply metal and glass. All the other materials added, start to contaminate the recycling process, and as industry works to recycle, they also now create harmful emissions. Glass recycling is perfect when it's clear glass, and then they start to throw out contaminated and coloured glass. Some platics have several lifespans, while others are useless.
Then as Looking has eluded to, there are other things in the air that are harmful, which need to be reduced, so let Harper do his thing. Your lungs may live to like it. Greening the air starts with greening our lifestyles. But and a big BUT, buying cheap sh!t from China isn't going to resolve the problem either. Buy GREEN, use your green to show you mean business, and demand the change from places you make your purchases.
You make a valid point.Compromised said:
I would counter however, that Harper's environmental policies are not based on opinion polls, or he would have us signed on to Kyoto. The environment issue appears to be more important to Canadians than it was 2 years ago. Considering this, Harper would be a fool not to listen to his people.
You show me political leader who isn't pragmatic, and I will show you a one term leader.
I don't agree with all of Harper's policies. I'm certain some of his actions are an attempt to appeal to the voters, but I find him less a slave to opinion polls than the previous 2 leaders.
What I like about Harper is I know where he stands on most issues. Whether you agree with him or not, for the most part he displays courage in sticking with his convictions.
Your first sentence states that Harper's environmental policies are not based on opinion polls but everything you say afterward suggests that Harper has heeded public opinion (listened to his people) and is being pragmatic (as he dumped Rona and hurriedly rebranded the CPOC as a green party). I'd just call that a flip flop.lookingforitallthetime said:
slowpoke said:
Well, wouldn't a flip flop d be to run back to Koyoto and budget to buy emission credits.
I don't think Harper or the conservatives ever said the environment wasn't important, but they must respond to opposition challenges and the electorate.
