|
Tories slammed for court program cut (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MarkT |
I will give the Tories one big *thumbs up* for choosing to pay down the debt with the surplus.
I'm still dismayed at the cuts to certain programs prior to them proposing (or even conceptualizing) replacements. |
|
|
| malek |
look i'm with you about govt spendings, i'm against them too when its to try interferring with the market.
the thing is NO company will build infrastructures by itself, only the govt can do that.
Anyways, at this exceptionnal rate of 13 billions a year (i don't think Canada will repeat that for many years), it'll take 37 years to pay down everything.
37 years without spending anything where its needed? You who always bitch that Canada is falling behind, well guess what, in 37 years with nothing done, Canada will look like Moldavia (no offence to them).
You always complain that we pay too much for our plane tickets, heck half of the price are taxes to the federal agencies. Why aren't they decreased to encourage travel for example and canadian airlines?
When you have surpluses its time to be imaginatif and come up with needed and usefull things to allocate resources.
About personnal finances, would you pay down your house mortgage first (say 5%) or invest it where you can have returns of (10%)?? |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
Dude, cutting the bull and redirecting those funds to decent programmes would do the job just fine while also paying off the debt. Look at the list of things cut. Mostly frill and BS if you ask me. And they should comepletely overhaul just about every overbloated government service. Dont cut the essentials but get rid of the BS waste.
Lets start with the gun registry |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
Dude, cutting the bull and redirecting those funds to decent programmes would do the job just fine while also paying off the debt. Look at the list of things cut. Mostly frill and BS if you ask me. And they should comepletely overhaul just about every overbloated government service. Dont cut the essentials but get rid of the BS waste.
Lets start with the gun registry |
|
|
| malek |
is health and education BS programs?
why didn't they allocate some of that money to those sectors?
at least to come back to the levels of funding before Chretien got the axe out (things never returned to the same levels of service). |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
is health and education BS programs?
why didn't they allocate some of that money to those sectors?
at least to come back to the levels of funding before Chretien got the axe out (things never returned to the same levels of service). |
first we have to reform health care or else its just throwing good money after bad. Our system is a black hole.
As for education, im with you there. So lets cut the frills and the BS and redirect that 1 billion dollars to education. I agree! But lets be frugal about waste and use the surplus to pay the debt while maintaining the services we need. |
|
|
| malek |
You see, the problem that fat, the provinces had to cut was really the bones. Were you used to wait 6-8 hours at the emergency pre-93? of course not.
the only way to fix that is to train/hire more doctors/nurses/specialsts which involves alot of money. The same that were forced to retire or move out of the country to continue practicing... not very smart.
universities have trouble balancing their books and keep asking more money from the students, its crazy.
Chretien promised then, when the budgetary deficit will be fixed, he would bring back the transfers to the provinces, he never did that. |
|
|
| Spam |
If the idea behind the program is to provide equality, why the denial of funds for competing interests like anti-abortion cases? You may not agree with it, but this is a country where "everyone is entitled to their opinion" is supposedly enshrined in our culture. What that really means within the context of the CCP, apparently, is "Everyone is entitled to the left's opinion, conservatives off."
Minority groups can gain funding the same way a poor person trying to sue the tobacco companies can. Lobby the media, fundraise, get in touch with special interest groups, etc. They don't need the government paying for their ability to sue... Well... the government.
The courts are already slanted to the left, why do these people need free cash to fund their cases?
Believe it or not, the government's job is not to grant people every freedom they believe they are entitled to. In the case of abortion, why are the babie's rights ignored, while the woman is given the 'right to choose'? How many Einstein's, Trudeau's, Churchill's, Gretzky's, etc. have been sucked out of women who don't want to take responsibility for their actions? (note: I think that when the woman's life if threatened by the birth, or if it's something like a rape case, that those are extenuating circumstances in this matter) But the CCP says "Who cares? Those women have their 'rights'".
It was a waste of money, we're talking about 5 million dollars to fund cases that then cost more millions of dollars for the government to defend. That then cost even MORE millions of dollars if the government gets the short end of the stick in the case. And why? Because minorities are 'underpriviledged' and deserve to get free money to fund court cases that I'm not entitled to because I'm a white, christian male? Doesn't sound very 'fair' to me! |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | The Canadian Bar Association — which has 36,000 members — said the government has been dishonest in characterizing the program.
"They're making it sound like these fringe groups were the only ones accessing it," said Guy Joubert, a vice-president at the association.
"That's definitely not the case. . . . What this move has done is silence the voices of marginalized Canadians." |
I feel the need to keep pointing that out. |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
I feel the need to keep pointing that out. |
The Canadian Bar Association? Like, the lawyers? Of COURSE they're going to be against this move. It will result in less work for them, which means less money. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
Not to mention that they dont deny that a lot of SIGs use the money. Part of the cut was a $5 million cut to the "status of women". Women make up 51% of the population. Some minority! Im sure if there are legit womens causes out there, someone within that 51% can find a way to privately bankroll that fight.
And if not then its probably not even worth it.
What this does is put a lot of people feeding on the government trough out of a free ride, and allows money to spent more on programs that we all need. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
massive debt payments is useless and is the easiest way to shed away those kinds of monies... thus why the lack of vision.
say, intrest rates is 5%, if they built a highway/train/whatever to alleviate congestion problem in Toronto, enhance productivity (and GDP), wouldn't that be better?
How about we add to the equation, that salaries and materials paid to build these, will remain for the most part in Canada and that the kicker is the taxation money coming back. 1 billion project, doesn't really cost 1 billion, its less. Why don't we spend the money on needed infrastructures instead of having to borrow the money later when we'll have no choice to build them. Its a good time for Canada right now, but it won't last forever.
Plus you're saying intrested saved could pay alot of stuff later, you're right! Canada already paid 86 billions on its debt, take away that 13 billion, and you have 73 billion already paid, at 5% intrest rates, those savings account to 3.65B$ a year which is a good chunk of that 13 billion. Why aren't those 3.65B$ spent on necessary things then?? it buys alot of subway stations and highway each year.
Finally, most of the intrest saved will be paid to Canadians which are the main debt holders, those intrest revenues are already taxed at 50%......and go back to the govt hehe. |
I think you need to learn about compound interest... |
|
|
|
|
