EPT2011 Canadian Election - Page 38
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
REM.ca
Canada354 Posts
| ||
|
Achilles
Canada385 Posts
On May 04 2011 02:06 REM.ca wrote: Yeah I was out of NB by the time Graham took PM. I can't say I was suprised by the last NB election though.....nor will i be suprised by the next one where NB voters start bitching that Alward is just as horrible. ehh...he's inherited one of the worst messes since the Chretien - Mulroney transition Somebody just made a good pt to me: McKenna HATES losing. So it'll depend on his chances + how much risk he's willing to take on for 2015. This is why he stepped down before he could be defeated by Lord. | ||
|
divito
Canada1213 Posts
| ||
|
Achilles
Canada385 Posts
"With the mandate we got, it's his obligation to listen to us," Layton said, who said he's optimistic they'll be able to find some areas where they agree. "What I'm going to do is reach out to Mr. Harper and say we've had our differences in the past … but Canadians have now had an election, they've given you a certain mandate, they've given me a certain mandate," he said. "Canadians voted for Mr. Harper. He's the prime minister." Via CBC.ca Jack isn't making excuses. | ||
|
ToxNub
Canada805 Posts
On May 04 2011 01:19 Flaccid wrote: Hey look, we've made it to page 36 without personally attacking each other. How Canadian of us. faggots. Actually i was really proud that jack layton didnt run smear ads like the other parties. | ||
|
antelope591
Canada820 Posts
On May 03 2011 21:39 Figgy wrote: Amazing how many immigrants we let in, you mean. And I'm not even joking about this, there is a reason it's so low. This is pretty much true at least from personal experience. We've been here since 96' and my parents have never voted in any election local or otherwise. All of our family friends are immigrants and they've never voted either. Politics just aren't a main topic of conversation in majority of immigrant families and never have been. I think their main reason for not voting is the fact that they grew up in a communist dictatorship where there wasn't even the possibility to vote. Kinda hard to all of a sudden start giving a fuck after 30+ years of living in such a system. | ||
|
RBKeys
Canada196 Posts
On May 04 2011 02:50 ToxNub wrote: Actually i was really proud that jack layton didnt run smear ads like the other parties. What do you think all those adds on youtube and the television were? The ones talking about how the Conservatives were putting criminals in the senate, or that Ignatieff barely showed up to any House sessions. All negative ad campaigns (e.g., smear ads). | ||
|
gold_
Canada312 Posts
On May 04 2011 02:04 caradoc wrote: you dont WANT the telecom industry to be deregulated unless you own a telecom corporation. It will allow them to implement metered charges, and will also basically kill many small providers since Bell and Telus own almost all of the infrastructure. Deregulation will allow foreign companys like Verizon ( or insert any big telecom company from the world ) to come into Canada and provide us with FTTH. Which currently these company's are blocked from coming into Canada, because they aren't Canadian owned. Right now the CRTC is blocking any company's from creating / providing service unless they are proved to be Canadian. Look at areas WIND ( Globalive - funded by a egypt telecom company - in court now to try and prove they are Canadian funded ) are currently servicing wireless, unlimited talk & data for like $40.00 / month. I live like 1 hour away from a service area and I pay Rogers ( the CANADIAN company ) more than double that a month for 250 minutes and 500mb of data. Things need to change, protecting Roger/Telus/Shaw/Bell/Videotron from foreign competition is bullshit! | ||
|
Ben...
Canada3485 Posts
I hope how the NDP campaigned (actually talking about your platform in ads and not constantly attacking the other parties) will become the norm in the next election instead of the American style attack ads the other parties put out. The Conservative ad that constantly said only that the other parties would raise taxes was sad. I can't believe people still fall for that stuff, we have to have taxes or we wouldn't have any infrastructure. Edit: The Conservatives would gain my respect if they deregulated the telecommunications industry and allowed foreign competition. It is disgusting how much we have to pay because of the monopolistic competition that goes on here. Our internet is terrible, slow and expensive, our phone bills are insanely high for what we get, and the companies try to force us to use their crappy television services instead of Netflix or other services by capping the amount of bandwidth we use at an extremely low amount. | ||
|
Inschato
Canada1349 Posts
On May 04 2011 03:27 RBKeys wrote: What do you think all those adds on youtube and the television were? The ones talking about how the Conservatives were putting criminals in the senate, or that Ignatieff barely showed up to any House sessions. All negative ad campaigns (e.g., smear ads). Sometimes I wish I didn't have adblock on, to see the ones regarding criminal senators (Did you know Conrad Black is a convicted fraudster, but is still in the House of Lords(British Senate)). The ones about not showing up to work seem to have made their ways to my ears, I'm not sure what I think about those. But I'm wondering if they ever directly attacked the leaders in the fashion that the Cons/Libs did. | ||
|
Body_Shield
Canada3373 Posts
See spoiler for excerpts from the introduction and conclusion. + Show Spoiler + As for coming up with a reason, it’s actually fairly straightforward. Here, we’ve seen repeated examples that would demonstrate a clear lack of understanding science culture, as well as actions that often undermine the very notion of scientific literacy. Sometimes, you get the sense that science just isn’t important to this government, and on occasion it even feels downright inconsequential. ... It’s important to note that science culture isn’t the only thing that drives a civil society. However, as a conduit for reasoned discourse and relevant information that affects local and global concerns, it’s obvious that science must not be taken for granted. Based on last night’s election results, we have every reason to worry about the Conservative majority, as the Harper Government has repeatedly demonstrated past activities that not only take science for granted, but treat it with a form of contempt. The Harper government has consistently ignored whatever sound utility the scientific endeavor can provide, and by doing so, has put the future of Canadian science at risk, as well as the elements of society that would have otherwise benefited from it. In the end, this means that we must watch the actions of this Harper Government more closely; and to be vocal, to be active, and to do our best to hold them to account for their actions. Democracy has given Harper a mandate to govern as he sees fit, and for this there should be an element of respect as well as an element of opportunity. However, Harper should not forget that Canadian democracy is ultimately driven by the people of Canada. For that reason, I will be watching you closely. Scientists will be watching you closely. Canadians will be watching you closely. Kind of a neat read. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On May 04 2011 01:19 Flaccid wrote: Hey look, we've made it to page 36 without personally attacking each other. How Canadian of us. faggots. wtf? | ||
|
caradoc
Canada3022 Posts
On May 04 2011 03:36 gold_ wrote: Deregulation will allow foreign companys like Verizon ( or insert any big telecom company from the world ) to come into Canada and provide us with FTTH. Which currently these company's are blocked from coming into Canada, because they aren't Canadian owned. Right now the CRTC is blocking any company's from creating / providing service unless they are proved to be Canadian. Look at areas WIND ( Globalive - funded by a egypt telecom company - in court now to try and prove they are Canadian funded ) are currently servicing wireless, unlimited talk & data for like $40.00 / month. I live like 1 hour away from a service area and I pay Rogers ( the CANADIAN company ) more than double that a month for 250 minutes and 500mb of data. Things need to change, protecting Roger/Telus/Shaw/Bell/Videotron from foreign competition is bullshit! Bell/Telus still owns the infrastructure, this will KILL small providers. | ||
|
ToxNub
Canada805 Posts
On May 04 2011 03:27 RBKeys wrote: What do you think all those adds on youtube and the television were? The ones talking about how the Conservatives were putting criminals in the senate, or that Ignatieff barely showed up to any House sessions. All negative ad campaigns (e.g., smear ads). I didn't see any of those. I googled for them, but couldn't find any. All I find are BC NDP (provincial) ads and ads targeting NDP. I watched a couple more of the conservative ones. My god, they are so full of shit I'm suspicious if they hired Fox to make them. | ||
|
divito
Canada1213 Posts
On May 04 2011 04:31 caradoc wrote: Bell/Telus still owns the infrastructure, this will KILL small providers. Even so, our population isn't incentive enough for a big player to spend the resources required to make quality product up here anyway. Rather than fight for competition, there should be some type of mandate from the government to keep us in line with the rest of the world in what they pay for services. Canada is one of the worst in internet speed/price in the world. | ||
|
gold_
Canada312 Posts
On May 04 2011 04:31 caradoc wrote: Bell/Telus still owns the infrastructure, this will KILL small providers. Sigh, do you really think the CRTC is going to SAVE small providers from Bell's greed? The only reason I am not paying usage based billing right now is because of Tony Clement stepping in and telling the CRTC to review there decision. CRTC regulates our telecom sector, and Konrad ( head CRTC fool ) doesn't understand it at all. If the CRTC is so great at regulating why where they so stupid when the initial UBB tariff was approved? They denied Wind the ability to operate in Canada, Tony Clement overruled that. Anyone in a Wind zone will know how much wireless prices have dropped in those areas. Small providers will be killed off eventually anyways with our pathetic CRTC regulating our country. Bell will get what Bell want's, so we need more competition. Mirko Bibic will lie to anyone he needs to. They first claimed congestion on the last mile, that's why they needed to charge UBB on wholesale. But Bell's IPTV ( Yes, internet TV ) doesn't cause congestion on the last mile. Then questioned on that, he said no the congestion is at the CO, oh OK so its the fiber link that takes my data to Primus ( my provider )? The CRTC never questioned any of this, just said OK go ahead. Good regulation! | ||
|
PWN3R3D
37 Posts
| ||
|
caradoc
Canada3022 Posts
On May 04 2011 04:57 gold_ wrote: Sigh, do you really think the CRTC is going to SAVE small providers from Bell's greed? The only reason I am not paying usage based billing right now is because of Tony Clement stepping in and telling the CRTC to review there decision. CRTC regulates our telecom sector, and Konrad ( head CRTC fool ) doesn't understand it at all. If the CRTC is so great at regulating why where they so stupid when the initial UBB tariff was approved? They denied Wind the ability to operate in Canada, Tony Clement overruled that. Anyone in a Wind zone will know how much wireless prices have dropped in those areas. Small providers will be killed off eventually anyways with our pathetic CRTC regulating our country. Bell will get what Bell want's, so we need more competition. Mirko Bibic will lie to anyone he needs to. They first claimed congestion on the last mile, that's why they needed to charge UBB on wholesale. But Bell's IPTV ( Yes, internet TV ) doesn't cause congestion on the last mile. Then questioned on that, he said no the congestion is at the CO, oh OK so its the fiber link that takes my data to Primus ( my provider )? The CRTC never questioned any of this, just said OK go ahead. Good regulation! agree in general, but to me this all just suggests we need a stronger CRTC that isn't beholden to corporate interests. | ||
|
gold_
Canada312 Posts
On May 04 2011 05:13 caradoc wrote: agree in general, but to me this all just suggests we need a stronger CRTC that isn't beholden to corporate interests. That would work also, I completely agree! But who can Canada trust to run it without corporate interest? Without taking secret gifts for approval of tariffs? They would have to be really rich! =D | ||
|
Zerokaiser
Canada885 Posts
On May 04 2011 05:02 PWN3R3D wrote: I really hope Gilles Duceppe goes provincial after this. Make the PQ win the next provincial elections and separate from canada so we dont have to deal with this bullshit anymore.... Lol, posts like this make me a giddy unicorn knowing that not even Quebec voted for the Bloc Quebecois. | ||
| ||
