"informed voters"
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 9 Next
romanP @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:11 pm
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
$1:
Knowledge first, hearts second. Emotional arguments lead to poor choices.
I'll agree with that, most of the time, but consider this....
You can't temper steel unless you heat it to the correct temperature before cooling it in oil.
I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make. If it's that people should be set in their ways and use that to make decisions, you are poorly mistaken. As Les Claypool once wrote, defying the laws of tradition is a crusade only of the brave. If you don't have the guts to be informed, then stay out of the ballot box and leave it to people who are mature enough to be armed with facts.
Benoit @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:12 pm
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
Benoit Benoit:
Begin by naming one.
National childcare program - the Liberal know it alls would have us believe that a one size fits all program is what this country needs.
Yet, the redneck in me told me that they are full of crap, just give me the money and I'll use it to pay whomever is watching my child. My childcare provider wouldn't get a shiny nickel from those armed chaired assholes in Ottawa, and you know it.
The populace is desperate for more spaces in childcare public service.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... ional/home
romanP @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:16 pm
Benoit Benoit:
The populace is desperate for more spaces in childcare public service.
Sure, great. Shouldn't parents have the ability to decide what kind of care their children get, though? If there's one thing the Conservatives have done right, this is it. Daycare centres are not a good way to socialise your children, and I would not be happy if I were a parent and a policy forcing me to put my kids in daycare were implemented. I would rather have the money and decide for myself.
Benoit @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:22 pm
romanP romanP:
Benoit Benoit:
The populace is desperate for more spaces in childcare public service.
Sure, great. Shouldn't parents have the ability to decide what kind of care their children get, though? If there's one thing the Conservatives have done right, this is it. Daycare centres are not a good way to socialise your children, and I would not be happy if I were a parent and a policy forcing me to put my kids in daycare were implemented. I would rather have the money and decide for myself.
The federal government's decision to scrap the $1-billion national child-care plan promised by its Liberal predecessors had a disastrous impact on child-care expansion. "No government, federally or provincially, has done a great job planning for child care," said Pat Wege (executive director of the Manitoba Child Care Association), deriding the Conservatives' $100-a-month child-care benefit as laughable. "Their own website shows people putting that money in their RRSP", she said.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... ional/home
romanP @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:33 pm
Well, maybe it isn't enough money, I don't know. It may be a flawed implementation, but it's not a bad policy. If I had kids, I would rather have that $100 in my hand so that I can decide what to do with it than have the government decide how I'm going to take care of my children.
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
Mustang1 @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:36 pm
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
National childcare program - the Liberal know it alls would have us believe that a one size fits all program is what this country needs.
I don't think that this is a "wanton disregard for the populace" as it found support in a significant component of said populace . Sorry, you may disagree with it - and that's your prerogative - but it's not a good example.
Benoit @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:38 pm
romanP romanP:
Well, maybe it isn't enough money, I don't know. It may be a flawed implementation, but it's not a bad policy. If I had kids, I would rather have that $100 in my hand so that I can decide what to do with it than have the government decide how I'm going to take care of my children.
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
This $100 should at least go to childcare.
herbie @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:55 pm
Childcare is a good example of the fact neither the Liberals or Tories can THINK, just like the Dems and Republicans in the USA.
Shouting: IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ONE HUGE BUREAUCRACY OR NOTHING AT ALL!
Every damned one of us knows a single Mom who's just scraping by. Loosen the funding with tax breaks and training & construction grants so WE can choose one of them and she can make a 'just plain honest living' looking after maybe 6 kids. Let US pick them so lots of people get to be nannies, like one every couple blocks.
The neighbourhoods and parents can monitor small places like that, and they'll get off welfare or assistance!
There's no need to make it into a huge thing like the schools or massive corporate entities where the kids get warehoused instead of getting cared for.
The last thing we need is places with 40 kids and three unionized workers and a couple supervisors so only the wealthy or the gov't can build one.
romanP @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 7:57 pm
Benoit Benoit:
romanP romanP:
Well, maybe it isn't enough money, I don't know. It may be a flawed implementation, but it's not a bad policy. If I had kids, I would rather have that $100 in my hand so that I can decide what to do with it than have the government decide how I'm going to take care of my children.
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
This $100 should at least go to childcare.
How do you know it isn't?
Benoit @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:01 pm
herbie herbie:
Childcare is a good example of the fact neither the Liberals or Tories can THINK, just like the Dems and Republicans in the USA.
Shouting: IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ONE HUGE BUREAUCRACY OR NOTHING AT ALL!
Every damned one of us knows a single Mom who's just scraping by. Loosen the funding with tax breaks and training & construction grants so WE can choose one of them and she can make a 'just plain honest living' looking after maybe 6 kids. Let US pick them so lots of people get to be nannies, like one every couple blocks.
The neighbourhoods and parents can monitor small places like that, and they'll get off welfare or assistance!
There's no need to make it into a huge thing like the schools or massive corporate entities where the kids get warehoused instead of getting cared for.
The last thing we need is places with 40 kids and three unionized workers and a couple supervisors so only the wealthy or the gov't can build one.
Shouting: IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ONE HUGE BUREAUCRACY OR NOTHING AT ALL!
Every damned one of us knows a single Mom who's just scraping by. Loosen the funding with tax breaks and training & construction grants so WE can choose one of them and she can make a 'just plain honest living' looking after maybe 6 kids. Let US pick them so lots of people get to be nannies, like one every couple blocks.
The neighbourhoods and parents can monitor small places like that, and they'll get off welfare or assistance!
There's no need to make it into a huge thing like the schools or massive corporate entities where the kids get warehoused instead of getting cared for.
The last thing we need is places with 40 kids and three unionized workers and a couple supervisors so only the wealthy or the gov't can build one.
Not all parents can be deem sufficiently responsible for dedicating an amount of money to their child.
Wally_Sconce @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:09 pm
Mustang1 Mustang1:
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
National childcare program - the Liberal know it alls would have us believe that a one size fits all program is what this country needs.
I don't think that this is a "wanton disregard for the populace" as it found support in a significant component of said populace . Sorry, you may disagree with it - and that's your prerogative - but it's not a good example.
a simpleton redneck like myself doesn't care if you want to call it a 'wanton disregard', a 'bureacratic naivete', and just plain dumb.
to me it's still a good example of the 'informed' thinking that they know what the 'uninformed' wants and needs.
Edit: thank god for occasinal elections where us simpletons can set the record straight.
Benoit @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:11 pm
romanP romanP:
Benoit Benoit:
romanP romanP:
Well, maybe it isn't enough money, I don't know. It may be a flawed implementation, but it's not a bad policy. If I had kids, I would rather have that $100 in my hand so that I can decide what to do with it than have the government decide how I'm going to take care of my children.
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
This $100 should at least go to childcare.
How do you know it isn't?
Pat Wege (executive director of the Manitoba Child Care Association), deriding the Conservatives' $100-a-month child-care benefit as laughable: "Their own website shows people putting that money in their RRSP", she said.
Wally_Sconce @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:13 pm
Benoit Benoit:
romanP romanP:
Well, maybe it isn't enough money, I don't know. It may be a flawed implementation, but it's not a bad policy. If I had kids, I would rather have that $100 in my hand so that I can decide what to do with it than have the government decide how I'm going to take care of my children.
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
This $100 should at least go to childcare.
my redneck belief told me that my $100 should at least go to my son's childcare.
the "informed" accused people like myself of spending it on beer.
Benoit @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:15 pm
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
Benoit Benoit:
romanP romanP:
Well, maybe it isn't enough money, I don't know. It may be a flawed implementation, but it's not a bad policy. If I had kids, I would rather have that $100 in my hand so that I can decide what to do with it than have the government decide how I'm going to take care of my children.
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
If anything, that $100 could probably pay a babysitter a few times a month, which means the money goes to someone in your community that you know and trust enough to leave your children with for a few hours a day. They say it takes a village to raise a child...
This $100 should at least go to childcare.
my redneck belief told me that my $100 should at least go to my son's childcare.
the "informed" accused people like myself of spending it on beer.
on RRSP
Public_Domain @ Wed Jul 23, 2008 8:20 pm
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 9 Next