P.S.: Anyone making mention of whatever fiscal deficit incurred during his years in power will be sorely bushwhacked with a large slab of Canadian Maple. Policies are not the question here.

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw

I can't see how a lot of the stuff in that speech is conservative. Ahem...

quote:

---

They [Liberals] do not seek to equalize everybody. They do ensure that equality of opportunity is there for all . . . They confront the powerful. They confound the secure.

---

Considering that American conservatives...

(a)...insist there already is equal opportunity in the US thanks to the oh-so-holy Constitution and therefore any form of affirmative action is wrong, and that actively fighting to ensure equality of opportunity is inherently useless.

(b)...rather than confront the powerful, allow them to pay for their political conventions (Yup, gotta love the fact that the Philadelphia convention was overwhelmingly bankrolled by Tobacco and Oil companies)

(c)...hold that the secure are secure beacuse they're good and the ideal for all society. They don't let the thought enter their minds that many of the so-called "secure" are actually greedy pigs who stay secure by downtrodding on the insecure. Therefore appeasing rather than confounding the secure is their agenda.

I can't see Trudeau as, by any stretch of the imagination, being a conservative of any shape, size, color or texture. Sorry. I'm afraid the the following is not an equality:

"Good politician concerned about the rights and freedom = conservative"

------------------
"...I was just up in Canada, Toronto actually. You know, they really hate you guys [Americans] up there? The funny thing is, they think you hate them back, when in fact, you just couldn't be bothered to care. Now in Ireland, it's a different story. At least we had the common decency to wait until the English invaded before we started hating them. I guess the Canadians are hating you in advance..."
-Irish Comic Ed Byrne on Canada-US relations

Oh, yes, the EEEVIL tobacco and oil companies! Guess I'd better change my party registration, eh?

Did it ever occur to you that those companies support the GOP because the opposition is unfairly targeting them for destruction? Oh, no, when people with ANY ammount of money get involved with politics, they HAVE to be bribing people to change their views, instead of supporting those who's existing views help them.

"rather than confront the powerful"

You assume that the powerful NEED to be confronted. The only "powerful" entity that has actual power over you is, guess what?, the GOVERNMENT. By your reasoning, we should give MORE power to an entity that can harm us, so that they can combat entities that can't. Illogical.

"They don't let the thought enter their minds that many of the so-called "secure" are actually greedy pigs who stay secure by downtrodding on the insecure."

Marx couldn't have said it better himself. Add to that the fact that you both could stand a class in basic economics, and you have a lot in common with him. You see the rich as parasites on the "working class" (as if the majority of the upper class don't work, anyway). That analogy is nothing CLOSE to right.

What good does it do ME to prevent someone else from getting ahead? Conversely, what good is it going to do me for the upper class to have the snot taxed out of them? It has no direct effect on ME. As for indirect effects, when the successful are punished, it discourages others from being successful. It kills initiative. If the owner doesn't make any amount of money any more, who pays the workers? Go get a good book on trickle-down theory. You could use one.

"the oh-so-amazingly-awesome conservative Republicans in the US ran up, proportionately speaking, just as big, if not a bigger debt"

It was the Democrats that ran up the national debt. Check the records. They controled congress between '80 and '92 (and yes, I know that the GOP had the senate for a couple years in the early 80's, but spending bills start in the house), when the debt was created.

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw

News to me.

But I digress.

As to your accusations of me being a Marxist and having no knowledge of economics, I'm sure that Smith and Malthus would love you to do lunch and talk about economic ideas that are equally-out-to-lunch as Marx's. And don't say I have no knowledge of economics. From what I've seen over the last few years, your economic knowledge must have been culled from a book entitled "Reagan and God: The lost conversations between the Lord and His prophet of Economic Piety."

I'm not all for workers of the world uniting and all that other stuff. I'm not a Marxist, but an educated and open-minded Canadian university student with my own personal ideas of how best to run society. If you want to call me a Liberal, than do so, because it's as close as you can get to my thinking. But don't assume that everyone who doesn't hold conservative ideological views is an adherent to an extinct econo-political philosphy that had a nasty totalitarian streak in it.

If you assert that there is a direct correlation that exists in our society between wealth and usefulness, there isn't. If you assert that there is a direct correlation that exists in our society between wealth and the amount of work one does, there isn't. Not to say that capitalism is evil. But to say it has flaws that a well-meaning government can iron out, often to the great dissatisfaction of those who have been held in a "secure" position by their economic dominance.

Visionaries like Trudeau felt that government wasn't an evil force, but an institution of the public, with responsibilities to defend the public interest. I hope you don't believe it's in the public interest to have a society where downright unethical tobacco execs make a business of spreading their addicitive and posionous goods to the public in an unchecked manner. Especially after conspiring with one another to cover up evidence of their product's harmful effects from the public, and by extension the government. I hope you don't believe that their interference in the democratic process by buying a political party its convention is an important step in curbing the power of the government, and by extension the public.

I'm beginning to suspect that Omega was repeatedly violated as a child by some evil and vindictive civil servant. His innate fear of government activity that extends anywhere beyond the realm of justice and national defence could only has arisen in that fashion, as could his view that government is a nasty and powerful force that has to be stood up to by the valiant forces of big business in the name of freedom for all.

------------------
"...I was just up in Canada, Toronto actually. You know, they really hate you guys [Americans] up there? The funny thing is, they think you hate them back, when in fact, you just couldn't be bothered to care. Now in Ireland, it's a different story. At least we had the common decency to wait until the English invaded before we started hating them. I guess the Canadians are hating you in advance..."
-Irish Comic Ed Byrne on Canada-US relations

Oh, don't get me started on Nixon. He completely screwed up the economy with his price controls. Don't ask me how Reagan got his tax cut past the Dems. I'm not familiar with Hill politics four years before I was born.

"As to your accusations of me being a Marxist..."

Did I call you a Marxist? I must have missed that...

And since that pretty much wipes out the basis for the next two paragraphs...

"If you assert that there is a direct correlation that exists in our society between wealth and usefulness, there isn't."

Of course there's not. A direct corrolation would mean that this is the case ALL THE TIME. As it is, there are maybe three percent of the wealthy who actually inherited it, and of course a VERY small fraction that got it dishonestly. But the vast majority earned it flat out.

"Visionaries like Trudeau felt that government wasn't an evil force, but an institution of the public, with responsibilities to defend the public interest. I hope you don't believe it's in the public interest to have a society where downright unethical tobacco execs make a business of spreading their addicitive and posionous goods to the public in an unchecked manner."

Of course I don't. But I don't think it's the government's job to DEFINE the public interest. Using that same logic, they could just as easily say that it's not in the public interest for me to be dissing the government, and arrest me. That's like saying, "Hey, it's OK to cheat on your significant other under certain circumstances. And YOU get to choose the circumstances." It's the same flawed argument that supports "relative morality". You may as well NOT have rules, because either way, you're placing your trust in nothing more than the good will of someone under constant temptation.

"I hope you don't believe that their interference in the democratic process by buying a political party its convention..."

And this interferes in democracy how? Oh, yeah, can't have someone supporting the cantidate that helps them, can we?

Final paragraph is drivel. Ignored.

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw

"Did it ever occur to you that those companies support the GOP because the opposition is unfairly targeting them for destruction? Oh, no, when people with ANY ammount of money get involved with politics, they HAVE to be bribing people to change their views, instead of supporting those who's existing views help them."

Point one for Omega. Yes, he DOES have a point. But whether or not whatever present government is targeting them for destruction is unfair can go both ways. Like say, I could charge them with criminal negligence, if they knew beforehand that they were putting out a product that could kill people, and enhancing that same product with more stuff that could keep people hooked on smoking, thus killing them even quicker.

We're talking unethical and unmoral Business practices. And that does justify the destruction of a company. Morally, AND by law, that is.

"You assume that the powerful NEED to be confronted. The only "powerful" entity that has actual power over you is, guess what?, the GOVERNMENT. By your reasoning, we should give MORE power to an entity that can harm us, so that they can combat entities that can't. Illogical."

Omega, for CHRIST sakes, please stop saying that the government is harming society. Government is supposed to act as the mediator between all classes of people, whether it is different races, different shapes, and different classes.

I am hoping that you believe that the Government is not the only harmful entity out there. There are other businesses who sometimes may have more power than the government. To your credit, Omaga, these are the so-called companies who "support parties whose existing views help them", which sort-of nullifies my point. But when these big companies tell the government to do certain things which could possibly harm society as a whole (whether it be health, environment, or education), and when the government complies with their requests, over the overwhelming opposition of the common folk, THEN we have a problem here.

Keep in mind that the last paragraph was based on ONTARIO politics. I will submit that I do not know if such things happen in the US.

"Marx couldn't have said it better himself. Add to that the fact that you both could stand a class in basic economics, and you have a lot in common with him. You see the rich as parasites on the "working class" (as if the majority of the upper class don't work, anyway). That analogy is nothing CLOSE to right."

Yes the rich do work, to their credit. Now to back Tom's point, they "stay secure by downtrodding on the insecure". They do this by suggesting the government do things that, as I said in my last paragraph, are against the wishes against the common folk. These are the same people who maintain that the rich pay less tax than the poor. These are the same people who don't care when their paycheques are getting a fat bonus, while their lower class workers are receiving pink slips to increase their so-called botton line. These are the same people who don't see something wrong when the gap between the rich and the poor are growing to insurmountable heights, while they suggest that social services, designed to help the lower class, be cut beyond all recognition. These are the same people who suggest policies about making private universities and hospitals so that the rich can pay for first rate education and healthcare, while the lower class gets anything lower than substandard (AKA two-tiered Health and Education).

Again, Ontario policies only. Don't bash me simply because I'm inferring to whatever chaos is happening up here.

"What good does it do ME to prevent someone else from getting ahead? Conversely, what good is it going to do me for the upper class to have the snot taxed out of them? It has no direct effect on ME. As for indirect effects, when the successful are punished, it discourages others from being successful. It kills initiative. If the owner doesn't make any amount of money any more, who pays the workers? Go get a good book on trickle-down theory. You could use one."

That last two sentences is mudslinging. That being aside, its not being about punishing those who are successful. It's about "listen, I know you're making oodles of money, so could you spare some so we can give some other people a helping hand? That's what we're here for." Now I still say "helping hand", not "free cake".

Taxes should NEVER be too high. Do that and you frighten away business. But then, Taxes should NEVER be too low. Do that, and you have no aids to help the less fortunate, no aids to fund hospitals, no aids to fund utilities, no aids to fund schools, and so on.

If you ever heard of Walkerton, Ontario, then I suggest you look that up. Six people died from drinking contaminated water. The initial report suggested negligence, but there is also evidence that the local water commission did not have the necessary money to make repairs, tests, and inspections to the filtering equipment. That money used to be funded by the government, but went up in smoke when the Conservative government cut off all funding to pay for an ill-advised Tax cut.

"Did I call you a Marxist? I must have missed that... And since that pretty much wipes out the basis for the next two paragraphs..."

Not necessarily, give him a benefit of a doubt.

"Of course there's not. A direct corrolation would mean that this is the case ALL THE TIME. As it is, there are maybe three percent of the wealthy who actually inherited it, and of course a VERY small fraction that got it dishonestly. But the vast majority earned it flat out."

The point that Tom is trying to make is how to justify the bonus that a CEO gets while lower class workers are being laid off at the same time. If a company is trying to make profit, they must cut overhead. And that overhead must exist in all sectors of the business, NOT just the lower class workers.

If you were working at a company, and they laid you off, and you find that the CEO gets a bonus the size of your annual salary, you'd be pissed off too, right?

"Of course I don't. But I don't think it's the government's job to DEFINE the public interest."

Point, Omega. But the government is supposed to represent the public interest, they are supposed to walk a balance between all sorts of groups, between the rich and the poor. That was Trudeau's vision. Business groups may have hated him for doing that, but it appears that the majority of Canadians (aside from a few Quebeckers who were unfortunately involved in the FLQ crisis) didn't.

"And this interferes in democracy how? Oh, yeah, can't have someone supporting the cantidate that helps them, can we?"

Again, point, Omega. I feel that there is nothing to comment here.

As for Tom's last paragraph, drivel indeed. But I'd like to ask why Omega speaks so coldly about the government, and was there a past experience involved. I'm not inferring that there is, but Tom's remarks made me question the existence of one.

*PHEW* finally finished.......

------------------
"My Name is Elmer Fudd, Millionaire. I own a Mansion and a Yacht."
Psychiatrist: "Again."

Not when there are warnings on the packs, you can't. People who start smoking have every opportunity to know what they're getting into. If I know that a substance is dangerous, and use it anyway, it's my own darned fault.

"Omega, for CHRIST sakes, please stop saying that the government is harming society."

I didn't say that. I said they CAN. The government is the only entity that has the power to actually force you to do anything. I'm not willing to simply trust them not to excercize it.

"These are the same people who don't see something wrong when the gap between the rich and the poor are growing to insurmountable heights"

"Insurmountable" is a poor choice of words.

"while they suggest that social services, designed to help the lower class, be cut beyond all recognition."

No one down here is suggesting this that I've heard.

"These are the same people who suggest policies about making private universities and hospitals so that the rich can pay for first rate education and healthcare, while the lower class gets anything lower than substandard (AKA two-tiered Health and Education)."

Funny thing, then, that these are the same people who support school vouchers, which give the poor access to the first-rate education...

"It's about "listen, I know you're making oodles of money, so could you spare some so we can give some other people a helping hand? That's what we're here for."

No, see, that's making the government seem like a voluntary charity. It's more about "Listen, you've got WAY more money than you need. Fork some over or we put you in jail."

As for your example, of course it can be taken too far. Cutting spening and taxes is good, but only if done responsibly.

"If you were working at a company, and they laid you off, and you find that the CEO gets a bonus the size of your annual salary, you'd be pissed off too, right?"

Companies don't lay off workers just to give higher-ups a bonus. That'd be stupid, and business owners aren't stupid (at least, not the successful ones). If they lay off workers, they have a reason. Namely, that they're not needed any more for whatever reason, or that they're not doing their job as well as needed. I SERIOUSLY doubt that you could find an instance where some poor sap is fired, specifically to give the boss a bonus.

"But I'd like to ask why Omega speaks so coldly about the government, and was there a past experience involved."

Nope, no traumatic audits when I was six, nothing like that. I just don't like having a ANY chance of someone being able to force me to do something, and my having no chance at stopping them. I take ANY threat to me and mine quite seriously, especially when the chances of it happening are incalculable, and when it doesn't take all that much to be prepared.

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw

quote:

---

Not when there are warnings on the packs, you can't. People who start smoking have every opportunity to know what they're getting into. If I know that a substance is dangerous, and use it anyway, it's my own darned fault.

---

How recently did they put warnings on the packs? I think the people who started before this have a legitimate beef. Smokers are shit, anyway.

------------------
"...you know, Omega, there's a phrase you might want to look up. It goes something like "paranoid arrogant fuckwit who has more chance of ejaculating to the moon than he has of ever convincing a girl that he's a viable prospect for marriage." -PsyLiam, September 16, 2000 10:23 PM.

My father makes $40,000. He has(had) 4 kids, a wife and a grandmother to take care of too. But according to the government, my dad was 'rich,' and didn't deserve very many tax breaks, nor did he qualify for any government programs to help. I myself have to pay 20% taxes, and I think its too much.

------------------
Intelligence, Integrity, Responsibility.
Vote Bush/Cheney 2000

Things don't work quite that way around my home. My mom can't ORDER me to do anything. I simply tend to defer to her superior experience. Ever since I was four, if she told me not to do something, I had to have a reason. If I don't like the reason, well, forget that, I'm doing it anyway. She tends to give in once I see that she's being irrational.

"How recently did they put warnings on the packs?"

Seventies, was it? Just a guess...

"I think the people who started before this have a legitimate beef."

Well, of course. But as a side note, you can't sue them for untold billions of dollars. They didn't do THAT much damage.

And if I read this correctly, Jeff, your dad pays NOTHING under the Bush tax plan. Good call.

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw

Okay, Omega has now made me scared about having children. If someone who was home-schooled, had two parents, and was installed with a good sense of religious morals from a young age still turned out to be a bit of a twat, what hope have any of us got?

(I should point out that I don't mean that. I love Omega. I really do. Although I do get tempted to stuff him full of straw and position him outside my house to scare away thieves.)

'"How recently did they put warnings on the packs?"'

"Seventies, was it? Just a guess..."

We only got them in the UK in the 90s. Around the same time that advertising ciggies on TV was banned.

------------------
"Why do you want to spend time with a deer? They're so stupid, they get hypnotized by headlights!" - Guido Anchovy

[This message has been edited by PsyLiam (edited October 16, 2000).]

Well, that's your gov'ment's fault. They certainly should have warnings.

And if you really want to scare away thieves, just get a gun, and advertize that you have one. Not many robbers would be so stupid as to break in then.

'Course, then you'd have to deal with the police...

------------------
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it."
- George Bernard Shaw

quote:

---

Well, that's your gov'ment's fault. They certainly should have warnings.

---

But by your reasoning the government should have nothing to do with that sort of thing.

Incoherence - 1
Consistency - Nil

Thank you Omega for that lesson in conservative jive talk.

Liam:

I am very interested in that "Scare Omega" idea you have. Oh, that would be priceless. Maybe a life-sized resin figure of our favorite conservative would turn the trick. We could place them in places to scare bad people away...like subway stations or dark alleys.