News   Jul 29, 2024
Dash of Lemon
 129     0 
News   Jul 26, 2024
Amexon Looks to the Future of Transit-Oriented Living with Central Park
 1.4K     1 
News   Jul 26, 2024
Maple House Wins Sole Canadian ULI 2024 Americas Awards for Excellence
 1K     0 

Greens stifle free speech

She said that Canadians are stupid and that she fundamentally agrees with that assessment.

So what was the rest of her quote?
 
It sounds like the 'that' might have been ambiguous, which is why it's curious they cut off the rest of the clip.

She does put her foot in her mouth from time to time, but I doubt she would knowingly call Canadians stupid.
 
I think she was saying Canadians who don't support her environmental policies are stupid... but still, this wohman gots to be accountable fo' what she say, even if they did only take a snippet out of context

Q. 6b: Do you support preserving the current general age of consent to sexual activity of fourteen?

Elizabeth May
““No. I may be wrong on this, and I hate to disagree with Egale, but I do not think most (not all) 14 years olds have the judgement to deal with sexual choices. I do not want to criminalize the behaviour of young people, but to take away protection from much older persons. The behaviour of older persons is more likely impacted by knowing the young person is considered a consenting adult in law, even though the young person could be a highly impressionable, naïve 14 year old.
Click to expand...
 
If it's true, she'll have her turn at the leaders debate to clarify her speech
 
On the recording she said: "All the other politicians are scared to death to mention the word tax and they think Canadians are stupid and cannot ... and I fundamentally agree with that assessment, but most politicians believe that if you say you are going to put on a carbon tax and reduce your income tax, they don't think they can sell it. Its all about votes". I actually agree with that assessment myself. GST of 7% created a visible end consumer tax which replaced a hidden 13.5% Manufacturers' Sales Tax, but the fact the original tax was hidden made the whole thing look like a new tax and Mulroney paid for it. If you are going to tax the public it needs to be hidden, like gas taxes and the previous MST, or you are going to pay politically for it.

The whole discussion is here:
http://www.tvo.org/podcasts/theagenda/audio/TAWSPTheLongGoodbyeGDP022207.mp3

I really enjoyed listening to the whole discussion.

Lets say the federal government balances its budget by not increasing the amount it transfers to the province at the same rate its revenues grow and hypothetically lowers a sales tax 2%. By lowering tax the federal government is rewarded because everyone hates tax. If the province, which needs to cover health care costs which have risen over time, were to mention it would raise the provincial sales tax 2% to cover the fact federal transfers fell short and costs were up it would be punished... likely more than if health care budget was allowed to be left with zero growth despite obvious population growth and growth in costs. Lets say a provincial government achieves savings by downloading services to the cities and then passes on an income tax reduction to people. It will be politically rewarded for the tax cut. The city government, if it raises property taxes to make up for the shortfall, they will be punished for it.

I don't think the general electorate is willing to spend time figuring out the details of policies and how it affects them and the other levels of government's abilities to balance budgets.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top