Well the federal new Democratic convention has just wrapped up and Taliban Jack and his NDP party have come up with a number of resolutions that they feel will make our country a better place. Here are some of the gems they came up:
1. Immediately pull Canadian armed forces from our peacekeeping and other NATO operations and instead replace them with individuals trained in peaceful dialogue.
2. Demand that the US, a "government of human-rights abusers, drug traffickers and warlords who act like terrorists, destroying communities, killing and maiming innocent people" immediately withdrawl from Iraq or else face strict repercussions from Canada.
3. Canada will leave the NAFTA, GAT, WTO as they do not believe in the capitalist orientated entities.
4. Open up borders to anyone seeking asylum in Canada and scrap the current immigration caps.
5. Create a new system of "Social Ownership", whereby every major economic section such as banks, communications, healthcare, insurance, manufacturing, and natural resources are turned over to be run by the government. Oh yeah, they also want to have the mass media owned by the government so that Canadians aren't "mislead" by media bias.
6. Create a new day of Remembrance in November for transexual Canadians. Nevermind that they is already another certain Day of Remembrance on Nov 11th. Not that the NDP likely care about this; the brave people who gave their lives during WWI and WWII were likely baby killing terrorists in their minds too.
7. Create a new system of workplace equality where peers and co-workers elect a boss.
8. Legalize prostitution and common drugs. Other law / justice related charges include doing away with mandatory minimum prison sentences as these are unfair to the individual. Also, border guards will be a thing of the past as the NDP want to open our borders to all who want to enter our country. It will be up to the local communities to police their borders.
Sounds like a bunch of perfectly sane ideas to me - anyone agree? The scary thing is 17% of Canadians actually voted for these whackjobs last election!
[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 09-11-2006).]
IP: Logged
02:32 PM
PFF
System Bot
fierobear Member
Posts: 27075 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
I especially love how they desire Canada to abandon economic ties with the US and Europe and instead focus on strengthening relations with "like minded countries" such as China, Cuba, and Venezuala.
[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 09-11-2006).]
And I thought our dems. were crazy. How would any of that be good for Canada?
Oh and what repercussions would they level against the US for not pulling out of Iraq? Seriously?
Well they would send someone to have a peaceful dialogue of course. I'm guessing it would mean that they would try and stop the flow of oil and other resources south of the border. I don't know how any of this would be good for the country. In fact, I would go as far to say if these are typical ideals of the left than I would have to describe those who believe in such as mentally ill.
[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 09-11-2006).]
IP: Logged
02:49 PM
Patrick Member
Posts: 36360 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
If you honestly wanted people to know what the NDP party stands for, why don't you supply a link to a proper news organization rather than to a blog run by a member of the Conservative Party of Canada? Or maybe supply a link to the NDP party themselves? No, I guess that wouldn't be as funny...
As Spongebob would say, "Good Luck With That." I may be off the mark here, but I think the loser in cutting ties with the US would be Canada. It may better some things, but other things would most likely be worse. But opening immigration into Canada would also have repercusions here. Open the borders up there, and it's only a matter of time before the "not-so-desireables" find their way here. It would almost be opening a big door for terrorism. I'm going to guess that these people want to legalize all drugs. That way, their stashes wouldn't be in jeopardy. lol Gotta be on something serious to make statements like that. Separatism and isolationism, as history proves, hasn't got anyone anywhere. My guess, if those kinds of laws were to be passed in Canada, it would only be a matter of time before Canada would have to ask to be bailed out and need help to get out of the hole that laws like that would create. Not much different here. We have nut jobs like that too. If nothing, when it comes time to vote, it gives people a nice comparrison. Makes the other canidates seem like great people.
------------------ Whade' "The Duck Formerly Known As Wade" Duck '87 GT Auto '88 Ferrario '84 Indy (8/26/06)
Patrick, turn on the TV and tune into CPAC, or pick up a newspaper - there is plenty of coverage of the convention and some of the zany resolutions put forth by the party. The only reason I linked to the Stephen Taylor site is because he has links to most of the other media covering the convention, as well as links to download the complete list of all the 650 + resolutions brought forth by grassroots NDP party members. The files are posted in PDF format on Taylors website should you so want ot read through them with your own eyes. Apparently they are also posted on the NDP website, but according to the folks at Cannabis Culture (the first website that came up when I googled NDP resolutions) you will have to call your local NDP representative to get a password and access to the files. As far as other links apart from the Taylors site, here ya go:
Well the federal new Democratic convention has just wrapped up and Taliban Jack and his NDP party have come up with a number of resolutions that they feel will make our country a better place. Here are some of the gems they came up...
So tell us, how many of the resolutions which you've listed (among the more than 600 being put forward by riding associations from across the country) actually did NOT get thrown out during the convention? Any at all?
No idea how many of the above are going to be brought forth by the party for debate. As an NDP supporter - why don't you tell us? Sane Canadians would like to know...
[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 09-11-2006).]
IP: Logged
03:57 PM
Scott-Wa Member
Posts: 5392 From: Tacoma, WA, USA Registered: Mar 2002
And I'm all for the legalization of prostitution and drugs. Both our countries waste way to many resources locking people up for stupid stuff like that, instead of dealing with the drug problem as a health issue.
IP: Logged
03:57 PM
Patrick Member
Posts: 36360 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
No idea how many of the above are going to be brought forth by the party for debate.
That’s right, you have no idea how many of these resolutions are even going to be debated, let alone passed. Yet you start off this thread leading people to believe that what you’ve listed somehow represents the beliefs of the official NDP party.
This is the kind of misrepresentation of information that really stinks IMHO.
That’s right, you have no idea how many of these resolutions are even going to be debated, let alone passed. Yet you start off this thread leading people to believe that what you’ve listed somehow represents the beliefs of the official NDP party.
This is the kind of misrepresentation of information that really stinks IMHO.
Patrick - the people who made these resolutions are the same individuals who make up the NDP party. Some of these more ludicrous motions made were by current standing NDP MP's. How can you distance the opinions of grassroots and standing party members from the party itself? To me they are one in the same. Why do think the Conservative party has such a muzzle on some of the hardcore rightwingers they have in their midsts? Because they know the media and the opposition parties would tear them to shred should any of them make asinine statements like those put forward and recorded during the NDP convention.
IP: Logged
04:11 PM
Old Lar Member
Posts: 13797 From: Palm Bay, Florida Registered: Nov 1999
And I'm all for the legalization of prostitution and drugs. Both our countries waste way to many resources locking people up for stupid stuff like that, instead of dealing with the drug problem as a health issue.
What medical condition causes drug problems? Drug usage is done voluntarily. No one forces someone to drink alcohol, smoke pot, crack or shoot H. Instead of locking them up, just allow them to OD and go away. They get locked up because some of those users harm others to get their fix. Too many resources are used to help those, who don't want to be helped.
IP: Logged
04:27 PM
Patrick Member
Posts: 36360 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
Patrick - the people who made these resolutions are the same individuals who make up the NDP party.
Loafer, there are nut cases in every political party. However, as part of a democratic process, all NDP members are allowed to voice their opinion. All resolutions are voted on, few are passed. I don’t see what the problem is.
quote
Originally posted by loafer87gt:
Why do think the Conservative party has such a muzzle on some of the hardcore rightwingers they have in their midsts? Because they know the media and the opposition parties would tear them to shred should any of them make asinine statements like those put forward and recorded during the NDP convention.
Oh, I see... You’re in favour of censorship. Block free speech within a political party in order to preserve and present a certain image to the general public. Hmmm...
If you honestly wanted people to know what the NDP party stands for, why don't you supply a link to a proper news organization rather than to a blog run by a member of the Conservative Party of Canada? Or maybe supply a link to the NDP party themselves? No, I guess that wouldn't be as funny...
Actually, that blog post made quite a bit of news among the credible news organizations that you seek.
Oh, I see... You’re in favour of censorship. Block free speech within a political party in order to preserve and present a certain image to the general public. Hmmm...
Not in the least, Patrick. I am just saying that had the tables been turned and a few radical conservatives brought forth similarily contraversial motions it would be undoubtably presented by the opposition as gospel for the party's policies.
[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 09-11-2006).]
IP: Logged
04:43 PM
Patrick Member
Posts: 36360 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
I am just saying that had the tables been turned and a few radical conservatives brought forth similarily contraversial motions it would be undoubtably presented by the opposition as gospel for the party.
Yeah, and I'm sure you would've been fair and posted those as well.
Seriously though, you posted ridiculous resolutions which probably didn't even get debated as though they were somehow official policy of the NDP party. That kind of manipulation of info is what I find offensive about so many political threads.
We don’t all have to agree on how this country should be run, but cutting down on the BS would be a good start.
Yeah, and I'm sure you would've been fair and posted those as well.
Seriously though, you posted ridiculous resolutions which probably didn't even get debated as though they were somehow official policy of the NDP party. That kind of manipulation of info is what I find offensive about so many political threads.
We don’t all have to agree on how this country should be run, but cutting down on the BS would be a good start.
The words "draft" and "proposed" preceded any discussion of the draft policy resolutions. I posted the pdfs, unaltered, for public consumption.
IP: Logged
05:09 PM
Patrick Member
Posts: 36360 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
I saw neither of those terms used in Loafer’s posts.
Better check your glasses My second post in this thread says:
"Those are just a handful of their drafted resolutions. Other comedy gold can be found here: "
By the way, Stephen, just curious as to how you stumbled across our little corner of the world here? Does you website let you track back sites that link to your blog?
[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 09-11-2006).]
IP: Logged
05:24 PM
Patrick Member
Posts: 36360 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
Better check your glasses My second post in this thread says...
Fine, your second post states "drafted resolutions". However, it doesn't make your first post or the intent of this thread any less misleading. Besides, how many average Joes even know what "drafted resolutions" means. I'll admit I wasn't sure.
IP: Logged
05:34 PM
Wichita Member
Posts: 20656 From: Wichita, Kansas Registered: Jun 2002
Shift Social Security and Medicare Taxes to the "Rich"... umm... no, but remove the caps on their payments maybe.
End the home mortgage interest deduction. What are you kidding? I can't imagine a democrat advocating this... or me, it's about the only tax break a middle class homeowner gets.
Socialized Medicine... show me a plan that works better than the crappy system we have, not just changing from one bad idea to another bad idea.
Tax your pension funds. Hmm... tax how and why? You seem to be into new taxes... how about stopping corporate reorganizations that keep eliminating my pension because a company wants to grab those funds?
Tax your pension contributions also... Don't really care if the income there is taxed or not, it's a loophole like most of the rest.
Tax Imputed Income... Yeah... get that imputed income, that's what I hear all the liberals say. What's Imputed income?
Economically Targeted Investments -- controlling your pension fund investments. Know idea what that means. Most pension funds/stock options suck if your the lower echelon, that's proven.
Force employers to pay for "family leave." Don't know what family leave is, I don't get vacation, sick pay, or ANY other benefits. Don't see anyone forcing any either.
Government paid childcare for majority of voters. Hmm... interesting concept, but wouldn't work, because childcare workers are already ending up costing more than the workers they are providing the care for often make... catch 22. If it was government paid it would get even worse.
Government imposed limits on executive income. What executive? I'd like to see an end to utter failures destroying companies and getting megamillions for doing it, but it isn't a government problem.
Repealing the Second Amendment. Hell no, I want it revived to where every American without a felony is not only allowed to carry a concealed weapon, but encouraged.. along with the training that should go with it. And nothing stopping an American from owning a full auto weapon, or a WMD ('ill only use mine in the defense of the constitution... ok?)
Destroy talk radio Nope. But I think libel laws should be brought back, if your lying about someone, you should be penalized. That goes way beyond talk radio, I think our political process needs cleaning up, groups that put out slander and harmful lies should be liable for the damage they do. Free speech says you can say what you think, not incite a riot, not yell fire in a theater (when there isn't one... people forget that... not destroy someone through vicious lies.
IP: Logged
09:24 PM
Scott-Wa Member
Posts: 5392 From: Tacoma, WA, USA Registered: Mar 2002
THE DEMOCRATS' (SECRET) PLAN FOR AMERICA The Democrats have begun their campaign to frighten voters before the fall elections. It's nothing but a replay of past elections, the only difference being that they seem to be starting the scare tactics a bit early this year. I guess you can't blame them. Nothing else has worked. The tried to hand the Florida election problems on Bush. No go. Then it was the economy, and that didn't work either. They gave a stab at the "Bush is stupid" routine, but Americans aren't buying it. Enron looked worse for Clinton than it did for Republicans, so the Social Democrats had to give up on that one too. So, it's time to go back to Democratic roots. Try to scare the beejezus out of older voters. It's worked in the past -- so it will surely work this time.
The ploy is simple. Convince wrinkled citizens that the evil Republicans want to take away their Social Security. It's an old trick, tried and true. The Democrats roll this one out every single election. This time the point men are Richard Gephardt and Terry McAuliffe. They're both telling voters that the evil Republicans have a "secret" plan to reduce Social Security benefits as soon as they are reelected.
So .. now that the Democrats have opened this whole "secret plan" idea – what about the secret plans of the Democratic Socialists? Just what legislative agenda does the Democrat Party plan to pursue if and when they gain control of the Senate, the House and the presidency? Well, your Talkmaster has been watching these socialists for years, and taking notes. Here are just some of the goodies the Social Democrat Party has in store for the people of America.
Remove a majority of voters from responsibility for income taxes This is the biggie – and they've made no attempt to hide their goals here. The Democrats have been working on this plan for decades --- with no small amount of help from the cowardly Republicans. The idea is simple. Using "refundable" tax credits and deductions and such ideas as the fraudulent Earned Income Tax Credit the Democrats are working to shift the entire burden for the payment of federal income taxes onto a minority of US taxpayers. Right now the top 50 percent of taxpayers pay almost 96 percent of the taxes. The Democrats are close to their goal. When the majority of voters have no federal income tax liability it will be almost impossible to pass any meaningful tax cuts – and further tax increases will be a piece of cake, especially if the taxes only affect those to be considered to be rich. Through this ploy the Democrats plan to create a defeat-proof socialist congress.
Shift Social Security and Medicare Taxes to the "Rich"
Payroll taxes, as you know, are basically Social Security and Medicare taxes. The Democrats have almost achieved their goal of shielding the so-called "poor" from any income tax liability at all. But --- the poor saps still have to pay Social Security and Medicare taxes. Democrats conveniently ignore the fact that these same people will get full Social Security and Medicare benefits when they reach the magic age ... and those benefits must never be touched! It's OK, though, to excuse these people from the responsibility of actually having to pay the premiums for these insurance and retirement benefits. So ..... the next element of the Democrats' Secret Plan! The elimination of payroll taxes for the poor!
This is a plan that was put forth by Democrat Robert Reich on the Cutie-Pie and Holmes show on Fox News Channel on July 31, 2002. The idea is to, as Reich puts it, "lift the tax burden off the poor" by eliminating payroll taxes on the first $15,000 of income. Here's how you do it. The Democrats pass a law which says that nobody has to pay any payroll taxes on the first $15,000 of their income. Bingo -- the poor now have a completely free ride! They are now life-long, dedicated Democratic voters. But wait! Isn't that going to cost the government money? Are you kidding? Of course it's not! It's not going to cost the government money because they're simply going to raise the salary cap for Social Security taxes by enough to cover the lost revenues! Right now the cap is around $88,000 on Social Security taxes. To cover the shortfall Reich says they will just raise the salary cap by $15,000 ... to $103,000 a hear. Reich forgets, though, that there is no cap on Medicare taxes, so raising the cap by $15,000 would not recover the Medicare taxes lost by excluding the first $15,000 in income. In reality the Democrats would have to raise the salary cap by about $19,000. They would just round it off to $20,000.
So, there you go. Shifting the burden for the cost of Social Security and Medicare for low income earners onto high income earners. The Democratic way.
Massive increase in Social Security taxes As we've said, Social Security is a mainstay when it comes to Democrat vote-buying. Social Security was, is and always will be nothing more than a giant income redistribution scheme designed to create dependency on government and loyalty to the program's protectors in congress. The more money you pour into Social Security benefits, the more the wizened class loves you, depends on you and will be dedicated to keeping you in office. The Democrats need massive new funding sources to pay expanded Social Security benefits --- but they must get that money without raising Social Security taxes on the middle and lower income groups. The solution? The Democrats have a "secret plan" to expand the wage base for Social Security taxes. Right now you only pay these taxes on the first $88,000 or so of income. Give the Democrats the power and watch that wage base jump to $100,000, $200,000 and beyond. The eventual Democrat Party goal is to have people pay Social Security taxes on every penny they earn ... no matter how much that is. There will no comparable increase in benefits for the high income earners. The extra money will be used to keep the Democratic middle and low-income constituency happy.
End the home mortgage interest deduction
Democrats have been after this income tax deduction for decades. They call it a "subsidy." Now the more intelligent among us will clearly understand that allowing someone to keep more of the money that they earn can hardly be called a "subsidy." But we're talking about the more intelligent among us. These people aren't likely to be voting for Democrats anyway!
As soon as the Democrats manage to gain control of the federal government they will move to eliminate this "subsidy for the rich." They know that there will be little adverse political fallout. After all -- the mortgage interest deduction is only valuable to people who actually pay income taxes AND who itemize their deductions. Democrats have already succeeded in removing most of their core constituency from the income tax rolls --- so what is there to lose?
When the Democrats ride into power you had better be prepared to kiss that mortgage interest deduction -- and a lot more of your money -- a fond farewell.
Socialized Medicine
They already tried this with Hillary Care. It failed. Democrats aren't discouraged by failure. They just try and try again until they finally get you to swallow the poison pill. There are two basic reasons the Democrats are working so hard for complete government control of this huge segment of our economy. One, of course, is power. Health care comprises about 15% of our national economy. If the government can seize control of this large a segment of our economy a giant step toward a socialist economy will have been achieved. The second reason is control. Think about it. If you control a person's access to healthcare ... you effectively control that person.
Right now the Democrats have had to put their plans for socialized medicine on hold. Those pesky Republicans in the House and the White House are making things tough. Democrats have to be satisfied with just sitting up there in the Beltway blocking any efforts to introduce competition into the medical marketplace.
Democrats live in quaking fear of free market competition. This was one of the reasons they worked so hard to defeat Bush's economic stimulus plan. There was a provision in that plan that would allow laid-off workers to go out into the marketplace to find health insurance. They would then be allowed a tax credit to cover the cost of that health insurance premium. Democrats wanted federal funds to be paid to employers to encourage employers to extend health insurance benefits to laid-off workers. Democrats knew that if private individuals ventured into the free marketplace to find health insurance they might just find that free market competition could deliver a superior insurance product at a reduced price.
Tax your pension funds
This idea first received serious consideration in the early Clintonista years. As soon as the Republicans took control of the Congress the idea disappeared. Right now it's being "secretly" incubated by Democrats to be hatched when they regain control. The idea is simple. There are trillions of dollars out there in various private pension and 401K plans. All of these trillions of dollars are earning interest for (gasp!) private investors and individuals and not for the government! To make matters worse – most of these private pension and 401K plans are owned by the evil, hated upper income earners.
The "secret" plan? A one-time 15% tax on the outstanding balance of all private pension and 401K retirement plans. This money would be paid into the general fund of the federal government and used to fund various social programs for low and middle-income earners.
Is this a dangerous plan for Democrats? Not really. The plan would take money chiefly from those who earn enough money to actually pay income taxes and contribute to pension plans. These people do not make up the core of Democratic voters.
Tax your pension contributions also
After the Democrats levy their 15% tax on the outstanding balance of all pension and 401K plans, they intend to follow up with a tax on all future contributions to these plans. The theory is that "rich" people shouldn't be allowed to contribute that money to these plans tax free when "poor" people don't have that opportunity.
The Magic of Imputed Income
Imputed? What does "imputed" mean?
One definition is to "credit." So, by imputed income, we mean that you are credited with income you didn't necessarily earn.
The goal is clear. Democrats want to milk the high-achievers for as much money as they possibly can. There are really only two ways Democrats can get more income tax out of you. One way is to raise the tax rates. At some point this is going to prove to be politically risky. So, how else can they bleed you for more? Even Democrats who have been to government schools can do simple math. They know they can get more money out of you if that line on your income tax return that reads "taxable income" can be increased. Forty percent of $120,000 is more than 40% of $90,000. All you have to do is impute – credit – more income to the poor taxpaying high-achiever.
So --- here is the idea that the Clinton Administration was tossing around prior to the voter revolution of 1994. They were going to impute – credit – extra income to people who own their own homes. This was going to be done for two reasons. First, to push more people into the higher income brackets where Clinton tax increases could reach them. Second, to increase the amount of taxes actually collected from these people. Here's how Clinton's imputed income scheme was going to work:
Let's say you own a home worth $250,000. Your payments on that home are about $2,000 a month. The government uses census data (there is a reason they ask all of those extra questions) to figure out what a $250,000 home in your neighborhood would rent for. Let's say it would rent for $3000 a month. This means that you could rent your home for $1000 a month more than your payments. But you're not renting your home, you're living in it. You must know that this just isn't fair to people who have to rent homes. They don't get the tax deductions you get. They don't own their own homes because, unlike you, they haven't, as Dickie Gephardt likes to phrase it, "won life's lottery."
Well .. since you're so rich and since you own your own home, the Democrats would really like to get a little more money from you, to spend on those poor renters and people who aren't as "fortunate" as you are. This would all be in exchange of their votes, of course.
So ... here is this element of the Democrats' secret plan for you and your bank account. When you fill out your tax return you will have to consult certain tables and government data to determine what a home like yours would rent for in your neighborhood. Using the example above, your home would rent for $3000. You're paying $2000 a month to your mortgage company. You will be instructed to take the difference ($1000 a month) and multiply it by 12. This gives you $12,000. That's your imputed income. Add that to your other earnings to come up with your taxable income. That adds up to more than $4,500 in additional income taxes if you're in the top tax bracket. Hey, it's only fair ... you being rich and all.
Don't gripe. This is all for those needed government programs for the "less fortunate."
By the way --- you should know that there is an imputed income bill in the Congress. It's about child support, not home mortgages. If you're a deadbeat dad who owes back child support you would, under this law, have to add the amount of your arrearage to your taxable income and pay taxes on it. Fact is, you've already paid taxes on this income once. The bill would just punish you for not forking it over to the ex-wife by making you pay tax on it a second time. Today, child support. Tomorrow, that money you could be making if you would only rent your home instead of live in it.
Economically Targeted Investments -- controlling your pension fund investments.
Here we are, right back at your pension funds and 401K funds again. Again --- there is so much money in these funds, trillions of dollars, that the Democrats just can't leave them alone. All of this money just sitting there and not one penny of it is being used to buy votes for Democrats. So --- here comes the idea of Economically Targeted Investments. "ETIs" the Democrats call them, and they're a huge part of the Democrat "secret" agenda. All they need is control in Washington.
Here's the deal. The government grants various tax breaks to these retirement plans. As you know, or as you should know, tax breaks are usually granted to force some individual or corporation to act and behave in some manner pleasing to government. The Democrats plan to change the rules on pension and 401K accounts. Instead of just investing these funds in stocks and bonds, fund managers will be required by the government to invest these funds in certain investments dictated by government -- by Democrats. In this way the governments can fund some of their spending schemes, but without using government funds. The Democrats will simply pass laws requiring fund managers to invest in corporations building low income housing; or companies who are hiring workers off welfare roles. Other "allowed" investments will be in such things as environmental protection, waste recycling and other causes popular with the left. In short order the Democrats will have rules in place which state that these pension funds cannot be invested in companies that are "unfriendly" to unions. To a Democrat ... any company with a non-union workforce is "unfriendly" to unions. Corporations who have affirmative action programs will get the nod. Companies who hire and promote on merit will not.
All of this will mean that the Democrats can claim credit for spending on some of their favorite programs without going to the taxpayers. They can just, in effect, use pension money. The end result, of course, is lower returns on pension fund investments -- and lower pension benefits to retirees. That doesn't bother the Democrats, though. The less money you have to retire on the more dependent on government you will be.
Force employers to pay for "family leave."
Right now the Family Leave Act requires employers to give employees about 12 weeks of unpaid "family leave" to take care of certain family events and emergencies, such as having a baby, illness, death or some other situation. The key here is that the family leave is unpaid. The Democrats want employers to continue to pay the employees while they take their extended vacation. The Democrats "secret" plan is to begin with a law requiring payment of about one-half of the employee's salary. This will give Democratic candidates the opportunity to campaign in future years on the basis of increasing the percentage paid to those on family leave. Paying people for not working --- a Democrat staple.
Seizure of property of those who flee Democratic tyranny As Democrats work diligently for more control over our economy and increase levels of income redistribution many high-achieving Americans are making plans to run. The greater the confiscation of wealth becomes the more people start looking for other countries in which to base their businesses. Democrats have a "secret plan" to impose confiscatory taxes on any Americans who try to move their wealth or their business interests out of this country.
Government paid childcare for majority of voters
The absolute last thing a Democrat would ever do would be to suggest to anyone that they shouldn't have a baby they can't afford to raise. Democrats know that children are the absolute more important thing in the lives of millions of Americans. They have been working for decades to impose ever more expensive rules and regulations on private child care agencies. They have also been working to raise taxes to the point that it is difficult beyond reason to raise a child on the income of one working parent. Thus ... the necessity of child care. If the government steps in and provides the funds for that child care then, to that extent, the parents become just that much more dependent on government ... and Democrats.
Government control of all childhood education (indoctrination) Democrats are the party of big government. Democrats are more than thrilled with the increased propensity of many Americans to look to government for the solution to virtually all problems they face in their daily lives. Democrats know that to teach people that they can expect the government to be there to solve all of their problems you have to start with the children. Catholic schools can be expected to teach their students that Catholicism is good. Jewish private schools are going to sing the praises of Judaism. Christian schools will teach the children that Jesus is really cool. Government schools? Government schools will promote what? Government! Thus, Democrats see a clear need to keep as many children in government education programs as possible. The "secret" plan? Continue to work against any ideas that would make it easier for parents to remove their children from government schools. This means working against such ideas as vouchers or tax credits to help parents afford the cost of private schools. They will also work to add increased regulations to parents who make the decision to home school their children.
Government imposed limits on executive income
This one is really going to have to wait until Democrats have a solid control of the federal machine. The Social Democrat party has plans to institute limits on executive compensation. The idea is to impose confiscatory corporate income taxes on companies who pay their top executives more than X-times the compensation paid to the lowest-paid employees.
Repealing the Second Amendment
Haven't you ever thought it a bit odd that leftists and Democrats are generally opposed to the concept of the private ownership of firearms, while conservatives and libertarians favor the idea? Well, there's a reason. Those who value and celebrate the worth of the individual and of individual freedom generally believe that the individual should be permitted to own and bear arms. Those who put the power of government over and above the power of the individual would just as soon see the individual unarmed. Armed individuals are, of course, a threat to tyranny.
Destroy talk radio
Democrats aren't fond of talk radio. They know that Rush Limbaugh played a huge role in the voter revolution of 1994. Leftists realize that almost all successful talk radio shows are hosted by people who do not share their political views. They will try to neutralize talk radio through regulation. Since Democrats love the "fair" word so much, they'll try to resurrect something called the "Fairness Doctrine." How would this law work? Well, for example, a talk show host would not be allowed to voice opposition to a particular Democrat goal without finding some Democrat to go on the air to defend that goal. Talk radio soared in listenership and popularity following the death of the Fairness Doctrine. Democrats know that talk radio can once again be pushed into the radio background with new regulations that stifle conservative and libertarian voices. Give them the power -- and it's time for me to retire. You should be aware that at a recent meeting of the Democratic Party of Oregon a resolution was adopted to use the power of government and the "fairness doctrine" to reign in those horrible right wing talk show hosts.
IP: Logged
11:22 PM
Patrick Member
Posts: 36360 From: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada Registered: Apr 99
The scary thing is 17% of Canadians actually voted for these whackjobs last election!
I'm guessing it would mean that they would try and stop the flow of oil and other resources south of the border. I don't know how any of this would be good for the country. In fact, I would go as far to say if these are typical ideals of the left than I would have to describe those who believe in such as mentally ill.
