TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Yay! There's not going to be another federal election... yet
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

Yay! There's not going to be another federal election... yet

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...y/National/home

quote:

Dion pledges to 'make parliament work' TENILLE BONOGUORE Globe and Mail Update October 17, 2007 at 7:32 PM EDT The Liberal Party will not send the minority government to the polls. The party will instead put forward amendments to gain its favour, said Liberal Leader St�phane Dion. If those amendments are not accepted, the party will abstain from a vote to support the Throne Speech. The tactic was quickly decried by New Democrat Leader Jack Layton, who said the Liberals should �show some leadership and stand up against the Conservative government and its agenda.� The reality, Mr. Layton said, cannot be �sugar coated� with �self-congratulatory amendments.� Mr. Dion says he will propose amendments calling for: a new environmental approach to meet the second phase of the Kyoto Protocol; to withdraw troops from the combat mission in Kandahar in Feb. 2009; and to bring forward proposals to reduce corporate taxes. �If they are not accepted, they will abstain in order to avoid causing an election,� Mr. Dion told the House of Commons. Sources told Canadian Press that Mr. Dion wanted to force an election, fearing his reputation as a champion of the environment and progress he has made wooing Green and left-wing voters will be seriously hurt if Liberals don't vote against Mr. Harper's anti-Kyoto message. But he came under heavy pressure from many of his MPs who worry about going into an election while party is disorganized, weak in Quebec, stagnant in the polls, and low on funds. �The Throne Speech we heard yesterday, with all of its weaknesses, has to be assessed in light of the fact that Canadians don't want another election right now. They want parliament to do its job,� Mr. Dion told Parliament. �We are determined to make parliament work, in keeping with Canadians' wishes.� The Throne Speech on Tuesday night included broad tax cuts, tough-on-crime legislation and the desire for a two-year extension of the Afghanistan military mission. The Tory government also promised to unveil new measures to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, apologize for residential school abuses, find money for infrastructure and require people who wear veils to uncover their faces to vote. Mr. Dion described the speech as �vague� and �full of holes�, and he said the positive notes were matched by numerous failures. It was encouraging, he said, to see plans to extend the scope of the action plan on official languages; a pending apology to victims of the Indian residential schools; increased attention to Northern Canada; and greater support for veterans. But all of those elements were woefully short on detail, he said. His strongest complaint was for the Tory government's environment message, which he said misses the chance to help fight �the biggest ecological threat our planet is facing.� The Liberals called on the government to immediately tell NATO and the Afghanistan government that the commitment to the combat mission in Kandahar will end in Feb. 2009. �By refusing to do so, the government makes it more difficult to replace our troops and to prepare a new Canadian mission,� he said. �... The mission in Afghanistan is an important one, but we cannot remain silent on our other responsibilities. We cannot turn our back on Africa ... and what does the government intend to do in Darfur?� Mr. Dion said. Prime Minister Stephen Harper hit back, saying that Canada was the only G8 nation fulfilling its African commitment, and he had made it clear to the United Nations that Canada would provided whatever help was needed in Darfur. He urged the Opposition to pass the Throne Speech. One of the proposed measures from the Throne Speech has already been passed. In its first action of the day, Aung San Suu Kyi was granted honorary Canadian citizenship to recognize her efforts to promote peace and democracy in Myanmar, formerly known as Burma. With a report from Canadian Press

Dion said he'd propose amendments, but since he already said he won't force an election, that means Harper can tell him to shove his amendments up his ass.

Seriously, can anyone tell me what the difference in platform between Liberals and NDP? I really can't tell.

Harper needs to pull his head out of his ass and sort out the Afghanistan debate soon.

Well, the new tax cuts (incl. another 1% on GST) is going to be nice.
Apparently a 1% in GST brings in about 5 billion dollars in tax revenue

I don't actually agree with the 1% tax cut to the GST.. Only because the tax cut mostly benefits the well off. Those who can buy big ticket items benefit the most.

I would suggest not reducing the tax and actually pumping it into cities.. They need it more then the $20 some guy saves off his new Plasma screen TV with a reduced GST.

*shrug just my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe I don't actually agree with the 1% tax cut to the GST.. Only because the tax cut mostly benefits the well off. Those who can buy big ticket items benefit the most. I would suggest not reducing the tax and actually pumping it into cities.. They need it more then the $20 some guy saves off his new Plasma screen TV with a reduced GST. *shrug just my opinion.

you're going to have to re write the canadian constitution if fed govt is to take direct responsibility for funding cities. mind you, the relationship between fed, prov and muni govt is all fucked up already, but it's the prov govt that is suppose to take care of the muni govts

maybe i'm talking out of my ass, but that 1% cut actually helps. that one percent through out the year adds up for everyone, so people can afford to buy more shit, and further boost the economy. (obviously rich folks more than the poor folks)

Too bad this was in the news today

quote:

The Conservative government has challenged the Opposition to pass its new law-and-order bill quickly or go to the polls. Minister of Justice Rob Nicholson outlined Bill C-2 in Ottawa on Thursday. It includes elements of several bills that did not pass in the previous session of Parliament, including provisions on violent gun crimes, the age of sexual consent, impaired driving, bail rules and dangerous offenders. �We will be holding [the opposition], particularly the Liberals, to account on this,� Mr. Nicholson said. �... After basically four months of silence on this issue, if they are serious about fighting crime, they should have no problem of expediting this bill through the legislative process.� Mr. Nicholson said the Tackling Violent Crime Bill would be considered a confidence bill, meaning the government will fall if the bill doesn't pass. Under the bill, people convicted of violent or sexual crimes three times or more will have to prove why they should not be deemed a violent offender. That would shift the onus away from the Crown, which currently must prove that a person should be considered a violent offender subject to harsher prison terms. The age of consent between an adult and a minor would rise to 16 from 14 years old; there would be high mandatory sentences for gun crimes, and impaired driving would bring higher penalties. The Liberals supported some of these provisions in the last session, although they opposed provisions that would make it easier to classify repeat felons as dangerous offenders. The omnibus anti-crime act pulls together provisions from five bills, three of which � dealing with minimum sentences for gun crimes, a higher age of consent and restricted bail for gun offenders � were stalled in the Liberal-dominated Senate and died when the Commons was prorogued for the new session. Bill C-2 forms part of �a series of criminal bills� to be released in the near future, Mr. Nicholson said.

link

Dion can go fuck himself... he's a lame duck, and its a matter of time before he's booted.

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree you're going to have to re write the canadian constitution if fed govt is to take direct responsibility for funding cities. mind you, the relationship between fed, prov and muni govt is all fucked up already, but it's the prov govt that is suppose to take care of the muni govts maybe i'm talking out of my ass, but that 1% cut actually helps. that one percent through out the year adds up for everyone, so people can afford to buy more shit, and further boost the economy. (obviously rich folks more than the poor folks)

I do understand about the constitution, but how the Federal government can have involvement for health care (since health care is suppose to be a provincial matter) they can possibly do the same for cities. If anything -- help with capital funding for the building of infrastructure etc depending on population density.

I just think that if the government would like to alleviate the tax load for people why not alleviate the tax load of low and middle income earners by adjusting our income taxes. This way the rich folks unfortunately would not receive any benefit however the low and middle income earners would benefit the most. But in all honesty it's no small secret that as a proportion of taxes to income low and middle wage earners pay the most tax.

I'm no bleeding heart liberal I just think strictly on fairness. Everyone should pay taxes the same in proportion to their income.

quote:

Originally posted by malek Dion can go fuck himself... he's a lame duck, and its a matter of time before he's booted.

Hey Malek question for you .. Why is Quebec so against the Liberal party? You can put in your own personal political views, this is just an academic question.

quote:

Originally posted by malek Dion can go fuck himself... he's a lame duck, and its a matter of time before he's booted.

I agree, i cringed when I saw Dion would be 'leading' this party.

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe I do understand about the constitution, but how the Federal government can have involvement for health care (since health care is suppose to be a provincial matter) they can possibly do the same for cities. If anything -- help with capital funding for the building of infrastructure etc depending on population density. I just think that if the government would like to alleviate the tax load for people why not alleviate the tax load of low and middle income earners by adjusting our income taxes. This way the rich folks unfortunately would not receive any benefit however the low and middle income earners would benefit the most. But in all honesty it's no small secret that as a proportion of taxes to income low and middle wage earners pay the most tax. I'm no bleeding heart liberal I just think strictly on fairness. Everyone should pay taxes the same in proportion to their income.

No no and no.


The federal has no buisness in health and no buisness in municipal affairs. Thats in the consitution of this broken confederation. The provinces shouldn't have let the federal get in health in the first place.

There's such an imbalance between the taxation at the federal and provincial levels thats its simply ridiculous. Every province (except greasy Alberta) has trouble with its budget, while the federal is swimming in cash and just throwing it away with no spending control!

As for the giving a tax break to the poor? you kidding us right? They're not even paying any of it! A GST cut would benefit them greatly because GST applies to everyone including the poor when they buy their mcdonalds combo with their welfare cheque.

I want a federal election.

p.s. about income taxes being equal among everyone, how do you explain that the rich ones are paying over half of all income taxes while being a minority?? Its a trick question I know but saying that everyone should be equal is a very slippery slope that you don't to embarck on.

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe Hey Malek question for you .. Why is Quebec so against the Liberal party? You can put in your own personal political views, this is just an academic question.

For Dion its the Clarity act or bill, check it out.

As for the Liberals, where do we begin?

-Gomery commission i.e. buying votes with cash and red flags.
-Handing out citizenships to newcomers for them to vote NO, check the case of Ahmed Resam.
-The "we love you" sit in with the " we'll change " promise...
-Cuts in transfers only to generate massive surpluses and taking the credit for "sane management" i.e. downloading of the defecit problem to the provinces
-The non-recognition of a YES vote, check Chretiens memoires.

so and so on.

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe I don't actually agree with the 1% tax cut to the GST.. Only because the tax cut mostly benefits the well off. Those who can buy big ticket items benefit the most. I would suggest not reducing the tax and actually pumping it into cities.. They need it more then the $20 some guy saves off his new Plasma screen TV with a reduced GST. *shrug just my opinion.

agree 100%!

and there's a simple way to circumvent the fact that the feds don't directly give money to municipalities.

the feds can take any amount they wish and earmark it for something that the city already pays for...like public transit. Contribute more and let the city contribute less...and then the city can shift that money to other services.

simple.

As for Dion not forcing an election...he really had no choice. Harper is in the position of strength in that the people don't want an election and neither do the Liberals. He also knows that he wouldn't get a majority, but quite likely would win another minority, so there's aero risk to acting like a cock and governing as if he DID have a majority (i.e. this is what I'm going to do...if you don't like it, force an election).

I believe there are going to be income tax break and other tax break on top of GST reduction according to Flaherty

quote:

Originally posted by cenik I want a federal election.

i don't...Liberals in not so good position right now

quote:

Originally posted by malek p.s. about income taxes being equal among everyone, how do you explain that the rich ones are paying over half of all income taxes while being a minority?? Its a trick question I know but saying that everyone should be equal is a very slippery slope that you don't to embarck on.

Of course the Rich pay half the income taxes since they receive more then half of the income.

I'm just talking as a direct proportion of income. The rich pay far less taxes then the poor or middle class wage earners. There are lots of legal ways that allows this that wage earners cannot take advantage of.

quote:

Originally posted by afterhrsgurl i don't...Liberals in not so good position right now

good. i hope it stays that way.

i'd have given martin a chance but cretin, dion? no way

they make this centrist cry

quote:

Originally posted by drgoodvibe Of course the Rich pay half the income taxes since they receive more then half of the income. I'm just talking as a direct proportion of income. The rich pay far less taxes then the poor or middle class wage earners. There are lots of legal ways that allows this that wage earners cannot take advantage of.

Its impossible.

The poor barely pay any taxes, and if they do, they recieve handouts (children, gst, etc) do you want them to start paying to be equal to the middle and high class?

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree good. i hope it stays that way. i'd have given martin a chance but cretin, dion? no way they make this centrist cry

i know this sounds mean since i myself have a little bit of an accent but for some reason Dion's accent bothers me at times lol...soo heavy

quote:

Originally posted by afterhrsgurl i know this sounds mean since i myself have a little bit of an accent but for some reason Dion's accent bothers me at times lol...soo heavy

lol. I thought cretin was the worst. I dunno how he could scrunch up his face to make the sounds he make

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree lol. I thought cretin was the worst. I dunno how he could scrunch up his face to make the sounds he make

hahaha...for me Dion's accent still tops Chr�tien's

quote:

Originally posted by afterhrsgurl hahaha...for me Dion's accent still tops Chr�tien's

*sigh*

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree I believe there are going to be income tax break and other tax break on top of GST reduction according to Flaherty

yeah...I'm curious how it's deemed responsbile to ditch this revenue. income tax cuts are one thing...but the 1% GST cut is fucking stupid, IMHO. Sure a bit of extra spending might result, but I think it's better to keep that revenue flowing into the gov't.

The average Canadian, unless they're buying a new house, isn't going to benefit much for a 1% GST reduction. Even new homes are often already subject to a partial GST rebate.

Just do the math. If you spend $50,000 (AND it was all on GST taxable items, btw), that's only $500 in tax savings!

So how many of you have spent anything close to that this past year, nevemind on GST taxable items? Keep in mind that residental rent and mortgage payments aren't subject to GST, and that's the major annual expenditure for most people, I'll wager. Much of your groceries aren't GST taxable too, so factor that out as well.

Can someone explain to me how this is economically more beneficial to the country vs. leaving the GST as is? Otherwise, I see it as a vote grab.

As individuals, it means little to nothing to most of us...but as a whole, that's a shitload of money that could benefit municipalities across the country, for example. Proportionally distribute that 1% across the country's cities and suddenly Toronto doesn't have a deficit, right?

KEEP THE FUCKING 1% OF GST AND SPEND IT ON WORTHWHILE PROJECTS!!!

I wonder how many people would scream murder if the Conservatives didn't keep one of their election promises

MarkT, the point is, I prefer managing my own money than send it to a govt that will throw it out of the window.

The more money you give to a govt, the more they're gonna go overboard.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.