|
Ontario Election 2007: (Vote October 10th) (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Sentinal |
Conservative 100%
McGuinty is a liar and a thief. 40000 pay hike, and he justified it by saying the federal pay is close to that level. Maybe someone should remind him he is not the PM!!! Not to mention the health premium (tax). Taxing the lowest bracket income families after he said and I quote "I won't lower your taxes but I won't raise them either." What he forgot to mention is that he will introduce totally ing new taxes and then take away eye care examinations as part of the OHIP coverage. Now I'm going to speak as a former University student. A 39% tuition hike is tough to swallow. Dalton trashed the tuition freeze and opened the flood doors for Universities to charge as they see fit. Residents of Toronto, all this talk of new taxes by Mayor Miller, you can thank Dalton for that as well. He allowed Toronto to create and impose new taxes because he forcasted a huge shortcoming of funds because of all the downloading that has taken place by the provincial government. Now Mayor Miller is by no means dealing with the financial crisis in a benefical manner for Torontonians, but you can be rest assured that Dalton said to Toronto "im letting you tax your people because we don't want to look like the bad guys by taxing them ourselves" Only the municipality of Toronto can tax its citizens outside property taxes. Thank you again Dalton. I feel like I have ranted on forever here but I really really hope that you guys think hard and long about whether you want Dalton in for another 4 years. The message he would get if he was re-elected is basically, "I can do whatever the I want because these people will vote for me no matter what I do". On a final note just remember about his getting rid of coal plants and his inability to even try and resolve Caledonia. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by cenik
so, when legislative changes are made in order to toughen up the laws--whereby such alterations almost always involve increasing the time an individual may serve for having transgressed the statute in question--the intent is to deter would-be criminals from engaging in similar behaviour via the state's display of the fact that punitive incapacitation will result for anybody who chooses to offend. |
No, the intent is to keep them in prison.
Is it really this complicated? Over a century of practical evidence shows that violent criminals and sex offenders (we're not talking about petty theft here) have recidivism rates near 100%. I don't really give a rat's ass about how well it works as a deterrent - if they're going to commit more crimes as soon as they get out (and they are), then don't let them out. I'm not in favour of the death penalty on practical grounds but that's really a moot point here.
I don't know how you think it's valid to look at a particular practice, such as mandatory sentences, and declare what the intent of that practice is. The intent determines the action, not the other way around.
And yes, sorry, I did mean convicted criminals, although the bail system is also a problem in many cases. |
|
|
| ShadoWolf |
 |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
probably Conservative depending on my riding's candidate..
|
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by ShadoWolf
|
Holy ! We finally agree on something. |
|
|
| Abercrombie |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
AJ, ideologically... conservativism is an ideology seeking progressive change at a moderated pace. The Conservative/Progressive Conservative parties in this country are not actually conservative parties... they are liberal parties (liberalism seeks a minimal role for government and laise fair economy). The Liberal party is a conservative party (ideologically). |
So the liberals are conservative and the conservatives are liberal. go figure. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Abercrombie
So the liberals are conservative and the conservatives are liberal. go figure. |
No, the Liberals are conservative and the Conservatives are liberal. See the difference. Of course the NDP are pinko commie bastards (but not as pinko-commie as the Marxist-Leninists... who are actually more idealistic hippies that need to take a shower and get a job then anything else). |
|
|
| DigiNut |
Haha, that's pretty funny.
The PC (and CPC) are fiscal liberals and social conservatives. Actually, I'd say that the PC are social moderates, although CPC is a bit right of center.
The Liberal party is fiscally liberal - the fed Libs are fairly moderate fiscally (if you don't count advertising kickbacks as "spending"), and McGuinty Libs are pure tax-and-spend. And both are a fair bit left of center in social policy.
Say the word "Liberal" to any European and they'll think: lower taxes, more liberties, free speech, etc. The PC and CPC are the closest parties in Ontario/Canada to this original meaning of "liberal", although obviously not perfect.
Nevertheless, in North America it is conventional to use the terms liberal and conservative to describe left- and right-wing ideologies, respectively. I realize this is backwards, but it only confuses people if you reject those definitions and use the classical ones. |
|
|
| exstasie |
| We need a true right wing party to run! |
|
|
| AustralianGQ |
| green party has the best platform, they deserve to win, too bad they wont win and are neglected in so many ways, ex being debates which is wrong. liberals are ing idiots....enough said their. so i guess aslong as PC or NDP wins, ill be happy. |
|
|
| EvilTree |
| quote: | Originally posted by AustralianGQ
green party has the best platform, they deserve to win, too bad they wont win and are neglected in so many ways, ex being debates which is wrong. liberals are ing idiots....enough said their. so i guess aslong as PC or NDP wins, ill be happy. |
That's really interesting, you wanting either NDP or PC to win. |
|
|
|
|
