The Canadian Election - Liberals Win Majority

[thejazz97]

Man, the "slippery slope" argument is as lame as it gets. You sound like the gun nuts who say, "If we let them outlaw our Bazookas, the next thing they'll take away is our hunting rifles!"

It's fear mongering and nothing more. Legalizing weed means legalizing weed. Not heroin, crack, or crystal meth.

While it is lame, it's also plausible. Each new issue dealt with will either open or close doors to the next issue. It's only a matter of time before they discuss it.

But like you said, legalizing weed means legalizing weed. And for the time being, that's all it will be.

We'll see how it plays out.

[inane]

While it is lame, it's also plausible. Each new issue dealt with will either open or close doors to the next issue. It's only a matter of time before they discuss it.

But like you said, legalizing weed means legalizing weed. And for the time being, that's all it will be.

We'll see how it plays out.

Anything is plausible, but it is as stupid an argument as those who say gay marriage will lead to people wanting to legally marry goats or beavers. Just lame fear mongering.

[RUPERTKBD]

While it is lame, it's also plausible. Each new issue dealt with will either open or close doors to the next issue. It's only a matter of time before they discuss it.

But like you said, legalizing weed means legalizing weed. And for the time being, that's all it will be.

We'll see how it plays out.

No, it isn't.

It would be political suicide for anyone suggesting the legalization (or even the decriminalization) of drugs like meth. Just look at the controversy engendered by even talking about the legalization of a relatively harmless drug like Marijuana.

[thejazz97]

Anything is plausible, but it is as stupid an argument as those who say gay marriage will lead to people wanting to legally marry goats or beavers. Just lame fear mongering.

http://thefw.com/weirdest-marriages-of-the-world-photos-videos/

No, it isn't.

It would be political suicide for anyone suggesting the legalization (or even the decriminalization) of drugs like meth. Just look at the controversy engendered by even talking about the legalization of a relatively harmless drug like Marijuana.

Someone on here mentioned that maybe they should legalize all drugs and see where that goes. It's not a smart move, tbh, but I feel like it would be more of a rhetorical challenge than anything else.

[aGENT]

Someone on here mentioned that maybe they should legalize all drugs and see where that goes. It's not a smart move, tbh, but I feel like it would be more of a rhetorical challenge than anything else.

I'm in that camp. We already have the pharmaceutical industry basically doing just that. It's also been proven that legalizing/decriminalizing drugs tends to lead to lower actual use.

Drug abuse is a medical problem, not a criminal one. Not to mention with legalization/taxation we would have a TON of funding to put in to both that very same medical system as well as education on the risks associated with drug use (as well as general education).

Drug use in general is going to happen legal or not. May as well make it as safe as possible, requiring talking to a doctor and removing as much power and money from organized crime as possible.

It's a lot (particularly for right wingers) to wrap their heads around but it would be a vast step forward for our society. I'll take baby steps (and the tax revenue) associated with nearly harmless marijuana for now though.

[RUPERTKBD]

Someone on here mentioned that maybe they should legalize all drugs and see where that goes. It's not a smart move, tbh, but I feel like it would be more of a rhetorical challenge than anything else.

People can advocate anything they like. It's not going to happen.

Legalizing something that is no more harmful than other, already legal things like alcohol and tobacco, just might.

[Heretic]

[Warhippy]

it's uncanny!

[Mr. Ambien]

I've thought Harper looked like a cross between Cary Elwes and Smeagol (in the beginning of the Return of the King film).

[inane]

http://thefw.com/weirdest-marriages-of-the-world-photos-videos/

Someone on here mentioned that maybe they should legalize all drugs and see where that goes. It's not a smart move, tbh, but I feel like it would be more of a rhetorical challenge than anything else.

Yeah, again, your ilk love this argument. You take the most extreme example of something, hold it up as the example as though it is common or a real threat, and freak out that if we change something it's a foregone conclusion that that extreme is inevitable.

Why do you that? Honestly, I don't get what you're so scared of.

[Heretic]

Yeah, again, your ilk love this argument. You take the most extreme example of something, hold it up as the example as though it is common or a real threat, and freak out that if we change something it's a foregone conclusion that that extreme is inevitable.

Why do you that? Honestly, I don't get what you're so scared of.

Yet...didn't you say not to be extreme?

You guys are funny. Like most things this is grey where you argue in black or white. Are they all corrupt beholden to monsanto? No. Are they all pure as the driven snow? No.

Stop with the extremes.

I doubt it's all his "ilk".

[Warhippy]

Getting back on track.

Harpers mouthpiece or spokesperson came out and childishly attempted to attack trudeau yet again.

=========================================================

Stephen Harper's spokesperson ripped into Justin Trudeau ahead of Thursday's highly anticipated leaders' debate.

Kory Teneycke says expectations for Trudeau have "probably never been lower for a leader going to a debate."

"I think that if he comes on stage with his pants on, he will probably exceed expectations," Teneycke said in an interview Tuesday during a campaign stop in Toronto.

Trudeau has likely spent hours memorizing "a lot of attacks" and rehearsing "pithy responses," but there's a big difference between that and understanding how to manage an economy, he said.

"At the end of the day, this isn't a debate just for the sake of a debate. It is to pick somebody who is capable of managing that $1.9-trillion economy," Teneycke said.

"There's only one candidate on the stage with a proven track record with respect to managing our economy, and that's Stephen Harper."

In a statement, Trudeau spokeswoman Kate Purchase did not address Teneycke's comments directly.

"Mr. Trudeau's priority in the debates is the same as his priority for the entire campaign," Purchase said. "He will speak directly to Canadians about his plan to get the economy going by strengthening the middle class."

Thursday's debate in Toronto is being hosted by Maclean's magazine and includes Harper, Trudeau, NDP Leader Tom Mulcair and Green party Leader Elizabeth May

============================================================

Getting right pissed every time I see a Con mouth piece say a "proven track record with the economy" 8 consecutive deficits 2 recessions and the worst job numbers in decades and they STILL use this frigging quote.

It's like John Wayne Gacy standing up and testifying in his defense that he's a proven track record of making kids laugh at parties.

At some point the anger at this lie will simmer over for even the dumbest Harper supporter. it inevitably has to because at some point the corporate welfare that keeps their businesses afloat will be cut off to appease voters.

[inane]

Yet...didn't you say not to be extreme?

I doubt it's all his "ilk".

How is that extreme? I'm saying him, and others who make that argument. I have no idea how you consider that extreme.

[\/ijay]

It is a proven track record, just not a good one.

[Heretic]

How is that extreme? I'm saying him, and others who make that argument. I have no idea how you consider that extreme.

Sorry, thought you were lumping "all" his ilk - not just those his make that same argument - in the same boat.

[LaBamba]

Both great leaders IMHO

[ice orca]

not saying going that far but harder punishments will make people think twice about doing illegal things rather then just passing laws to make it legal.

The war on drugs is a complete and utter failure since inception.

[LaBamba]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-commentary/media-failing-to-provide-perspective-on-conservatives-economic-record/article25834784/?service=mobile

Some vital perspective on Conservatives economic record

GWYN MORGAN

SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL

Last updated Wednesday, Aug. 05, 2015 7:58PM EDT

Several years ago, a Report on Business story highlighted this newspapers commitment to providing perspective in its news stories. I have long considered that a laudable and necessary component of professional journalism. Unfortunately, its all too rare in todays print and electronic media.

One of the most egregious examples of failure to present perspective came in the aftermath of the Parliamentary Budget Officers report that the federal governments forecasted $1.4-billion surplus for the 2015-16 fiscal year may turn into a $1.5-billion deficit. Opposition critics smelled blood. NDP Leader Tom Mulcair told reporters, The Conservatives have always talked a good game on the economy, but theyve never delivered on either. Liberal Finance critic Scott Brison said, Their economic record is in tatters.

Such over-the-top commentary is just part of the political game, especially so close to an election. But that doesnt excuse reporters for failing to lend perspective. The most obvious question for Mr. Mulcair and Mr. Brison is, How significant is a $2.9-billion change in an $890-billion budget? The answer is that it amounts to less than one-third of 1 per cent.

Despite diligent searching, I couldnt find any media reports that offered that vital perspective. Virtually all parroted the Mulcair and Brison laments about government fiscal mismanagement. Days later, a new Globe and Mail/Nanos poll found that the Mulcair NDPs had suddenly overtaken the Harper Conservatives as the best choice to improve the countrys economic prospects. That impression will be very hard for Mr. Harper to turn around so close to an election. Some may be happy about that and others will not, but regardless of ones political alliances, lack of cogent questioning and thoughtful analysis by reporters is anathema to presenting important perspective to voters.

Now lets add another perspective question that alert reporters would have asked: Given collapsed oil prices and the China-driven downturn in mining and forestry, isnt it surprising that Canada can remain the only G7 country besides Germany not facing a major deficit?

Failure of reporters to ask such a relevant question reveals a wider naivety among Canadians of the economically vital importance of Canadas resource industries. The degree of that importance can be found on the Natural Resources Canada website. In mining, Canada is the worlds top potash producer, second-largest uranium producer and third-largest aluminum and platinum producer; Canada also ranks as a top-five producer of other key minerals and metals. In energy, Canada is the worlds third-largest natural-gas producer, fifth-largest oil producer and the third-largest producer of hydroelectricity. In forestry, Canada ranks first in newsprint and second in softwood lumber and wood pulp. In 2014, capital expenditures by natural resource companies totalled $126-billion. Natural-resource exports totalled $259-billion, more than half of all merchandise exports. The sector employed 1.8 million Canadians across the country. Notably, Ontario led with 237,000 resource jobs followed by 210,000 in Alberta and 178,000 in Quebec. Resources accounted for almost a third of GDP in Newfoundland and Labrador, Alberta and Saskatchewan.

Unfortunately, the outlook for 2015 isnt so rosy. Lower oil prices are expected to knock more than $4-billion off federal revenues and even more for producing provinces. The slowdown in China is having a major impact on our mining and forestry industries, further reducing government revenues and employment from coast to coast. And given that resource exports are the mainstay of Canadas balance of trade, the Canadian dollar has weakened considerably.

Whether its a company or a country, the measure of wise financial management is taking advantage of the good times to build resilience for the inevitable bad times. In 2006 and 2007, the Harper government posted surpluses that positioned Canada to weather the 2008 financial crisis better than almost all other countries. Meanwhile, rather than building financial resilience during the extended pre-2008-boom, euro zone countries spent and borrowed as if the good times would never end, placing them in the dire debt predicament we see today.

Now, as Canadas most important industrial sector faces difficult times, our economy faces another major challenge. Those often-criticized tough spending decisions taken to rebuild financial resilience will be key to carrying us through. That our government can even come close to balancing its books in the face of these circumstances should be a cause for rejoicing. But where else have you heard that perspective?

Everyone talks about how media influences the public, Fox being one of the favourites. People don't realize it happens on both sides of the coin, the "villain" gets his fair share of drama driving headlines for no real good reason.

Vote!!!

[Warhippy]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-commentary/media-failing-to-provide-perspective-on-conservatives-economic-record/article25834784/?service=mobile

Some vital perspective on Conservatives economic record

GWYN MORGAN

SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL

Last updated Wednesday, Aug. 05, 2015 7:58PM EDT

Several years ago, a Report on Business story highlighted this newspapers commitment to providing perspective in its news stories. I have long considered that a laudable and necessary component of professional journalism. Unfortunately, its all too rare in todays print and electronic media.

One of the most egregious examples of failure to present perspective came in the aftermath of the Parliamentary Budget Officers report that the federal governments forecasted $1.4-billion surplus for the 2015-16 fiscal year may turn into a $1.5-billion deficit. Opposition critics smelled blood. NDP Leader Tom Mulcair told reporters, The Conservatives have always talked a good game on the economy, but theyve never delivered on either. Liberal Finance critic Scott Brison said, Their economic record is in tatters.

Such over-the-top commentary is just part of the political game, especially so close to an election. But that doesnt excuse reporters for failing to lend perspective. The most obvious question for Mr. Mulcair and Mr. Brison is, How significant is a $2.9-billion change in an $890-billion budget? The answer is that it amounts to less than one-third of 1 per cent.

Despite diligent searching, I couldnt find any media reports that offered that vital perspective. Virtually all parroted the Mulcair and Brison laments about government fiscal mismanagement. Days later, a new Globe and Mail/Nanos poll found that the Mulcair NDPs had suddenly overtaken the Harper Conservatives as the best choice to improve the countrys economic prospects. That impression will be very hard for Mr. Harper to turn around so close to an election. Some may be happy about that and others will not, but regardless of ones political alliances, lack of cogent questioning and thoughtful analysis by reporters is anathema to presenting important perspective to voters.

Now lets add another perspective question that alert reporters would have asked: Given collapsed oil prices and the China-driven downturn in mining and forestry, isnt it surprising that Canada can remain the only G7 country besides Germany not facing a major deficit?

Failure of reporters to ask such a relevant question reveals a wider naivety among Canadians of the economically vital importance of Canadas resource industries. The degree of that importance can be found on the Natural Resources Canada website. In mining, Canada is the worlds top potash producer, second-largest uranium producer and third-largest aluminum and platinum producer; Canada also ranks as a top-five producer of other key minerals and metals. In energy, Canada is the worlds third-largest natural-gas producer, fifth-largest oil producer and the third-largest producer of hydroelectricity. In forestry, Canada ranks first in newsprint and second in softwood lumber and wood pulp. In 2014, capital expenditures by natural resource companies totalled $126-billion. Natural-resource exports totalled $259-billion, more than half of all merchandise exports. The sector employed 1.8 million Canadians across the country. Notably, Ontario led with 237,000 resource jobs followed by 210,000 in Alberta and 178,000 in Quebec. Resources accounted for almost a third of GDP in Newfoundland and Labrador, Alberta and Saskatchewan.

Unfortunately, the outlook for 2015 isnt so rosy. Lower oil prices are expected to knock more than $4-billion off federal revenues and even more for producing provinces. The slowdown in China is having a major impact on our mining and forestry industries, further reducing government revenues and employment from coast to coast. And given that resource exports are the mainstay of Canadas balance of trade, the Canadian dollar has weakened considerably.

Whether its a company or a country, the measure of wise financial management is taking advantage of the good times to build resilience for the inevitable bad times. In 2006 and 2007, the Harper government posted surpluses that positioned Canada to weather the 2008 financial crisis better than almost all other countries. Meanwhile, rather than building financial resilience during the extended pre-2008-boom, euro zone countries spent and borrowed as if the good times would never end, placing them in the dire debt predicament we see today.

Now, as Canadas most important industrial sector faces difficult times, our economy faces another major challenge. Those often-criticized tough spending decisions taken to rebuild financial resilience will be key to carrying us through. That our government can even come close to balancing its books in the face of these circumstances should be a cause for rejoicing. But where else have you heard that perspective?

Everyone talks about how media influences the public, Fox being one of the favourites. People don't realize it happens on both sides of the coin, the "villain" gets his fair share of drama driving headlines for no real good reason.

Vote Harper!!!

Oh wow my head hurts

It doesn't say how he had the surpluses or even gives credit to WHY he had them (paul martin and the Libs left it to him), it also doesn't even mention how he sold off almost every asset he had and slashed essential funding to things like Vets and health care to give the illusion of any kind of a budget this year.

While reporting has been questionable on both sides, while ONLY reporting on the on the surface positives which is exactly what harper has done. he doesn't delve beneath the surface to see the how or why. He also fails to mention how Harper has failed to diversify this country away from being a single source resource based structure.

My largest issues with Harper are as follows

Blames the Libs for egregious behaviour. Goes and and outdoes them in the same way to a staggering degree

Lies about numerous successes which had nothing to do with him or his party

Has subverted electoral processes

Has failed to be open honest or transparent

Has hidden numerous damaging legislation to Canadians and workers rights

Has failed to deliver on promises still made in 2006 2010 and now is promising more IF elected again.

Harper has delivered 8 consecutive deficits. Has claimed fiscal management dependency based on a surplus left to him by the LIbs (I grudgingly admit that) has had 2 recessions while in office he admits he at first, didn't think would hit Canada and then didn't see coming. Has become economically by ALL the numbers the most dismal economic failure of any PM outside of a war and this includes PET.

When you sell every available asset you can, slash funding to people like Vets steal from EI and download drug and health costs to the provinces to give the illusion of having a deficit for 1 single year during an election you are NOT a smart manager of the economy.

You cannot ignore the bills you have to pay in order to make it appear you have money left over because those bills still need to be paid.

This writer is on the surface correct, in the same sense that Harper by his own beliefs is indeed a sound fiscal manager.

Vote anyone but conservative, they can't do worse

[RWMc1]

If Harper is re-elected his first act will be to introduce an edict to all Canadians:

Do Not Think Thoughts. We Will Think For You.