I didn't think we had a thread for this. 

Is Trudeau this out of touch or does he just not care?

 

Nenshi re-elected as Mayor of Calgary: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-election-2017-results-victor-1.4357873

5 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Nenshi re-elected as Mayor of Calgary: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-election-2017-results-victor-1.4357873

Part of me is glad because the efforts of the Calgary Flames were really inappropriate in my mind. 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/morneau-tax-reform-farmers-fishers-1.4361746

Quote

Federal Finance Minister Bill Morneau is climbing down from another controversial tax proposal to address the concerns of farmers and fishers.

Morneau said the government is abandoning the proposed tax reform that would have restricted the conversion of income into capital gains.

"We're going to take a step back and reconsider that aspect of our tax proposal," he said.

 

On 10/19/2017 at 11:54 AM, blue_gold_84 said:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/morneau-tax-reform-farmers-fishers-1.4361746

 

This only makes sense.  They clearly didn't see the implications that it would cost more to sell to your own family than to a complete stranger. 

I do think there has to be a "happy" medium here, though.  First of all, the "traditional" (unincorporated) farm wouldn't have been effected by these changes at all - so we are generally talking about some pretty wealthy (in terms of capital, land and possibly income) farm operations.  While it shouldn't cost more to hand the farm down, it shouldn't be tax-free either.  A fair middle ground would be to exempt "heritage" land.  By that I mean land that was owned by the family when the following generation reached a certain age, or even when they were born.  As it stands, an old, wealthy incorporated farmer could go on a land-buying binge right before he "sells" the land to his kid(s) and we'd all be subsidizing the cost of his new fleet of 500K combines with the taxes he avoids.

Ah yes. This thread. 

A.K.A give them a majority and let do what they want. Lather, rinse, repeat. 

Liberals acting like Liberals, well I for one am shocked, no one could have predicted this!

http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/provincial-liberals-harassment-investigation-under-wraps

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/liberals-kent-hehr-resigns-over-sexual-harassment-allegations/article37733581/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-davos-costs-trump-1.4503355

Bad behaviour by Liberals getting exposed on a daily basis

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/doug-ford-announcement-etobicoke-ontario-pc-leader-1.4508622

I know it can be boring, but anyone ever watch Justin speaking in the House.    What a empty vessel.

Just now, do or die said:

I know it can be boring, but anyone ever watch Justin speaking in the House.    What a empty vessel.

Reminds me of Paul Martin in that he's not a great speaker but can't beat those ratings. Guaranteed for another win. Then Scheer gets tossed and Maxime takes the next one.

At least we get a platitude for every pot....

Thing I don't understand about Justin is why Albertans hate him. He's given them (or tried to) everything Harper gave.

Quote

 

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau received an unusually warm reception of his keynote address at an energy industry conference in Texas on Thursday evening.

"No country would find 173 billion barrels of oil in the ground and just leave them there," Trudeau said in his address to oil and gas industry executives at Houston's CERAWeek conference, discussing Alberta's vast oil sands reserves.

Trudeau's speech was met with a standing ovation from the more than 1,200 attendees — an unordinary reaction to a keynote speaker, conference-goers told the CBC

 

 

Edited January 29, 20188 yr by Mark F

3 hours ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Reminds me of Paul Martin in that he's not a great speaker but can't beat those ratings. Guaranteed for another win. Then Scheer gets tossed and Maxime takes the next one.

Oh god please no. 

Bill to replace "in all thy Son's command" with "in all of us command" in O Canada passes the Senate, just needs royal assent.

This oughta cause some fireworks.

5 minutes ago, johnzo said:

Bill to replace "in all thy Son's command" with "in all of us command" in O Canada passes the Senate, just needs royal assent.

This oughta cause some fireworks.

so dumb.

1 minute ago, johnzo said:

Bill to replace "in all thy Son's command" with "in all of us command" in O Canada passes the Senate, just needs royal assent.

This oughta cause some fireworks.

Oh, I'm sure that's already the case. This is not without a ton of controversy.

My initial reaction was "really?  This is important?" 

However, the original lyrics were:

 "thou dost in us command"

It was changed in 1908.  I saw it noted somewhere the change was to appeal to young men going to war.  This change simply reverts it back to the original (with modern language) and removes a change that was made specifically for gender reasons. 

Im perfectly fine with it now.

35 minutes ago, johnzo said:

This oughta cause some fireworks.

I'm good with it, now get the religious figures out.

 

It's interesting that the change of a religious bit is being portrayed as a gender change instead of a religious change.

(tho I guess "thy sons" is meant to be "Canada's sons" instead of Jesus.  Learn a new thing every day.)

1 hour ago, johnzo said:

(tho I guess "thy sons" is meant to be "Canada's sons" instead of Jesus.  Learn a new thing every day.)

Interesting take.

So, you saw the national anthem as being song to God? God was the audience?

I've always seen the national anthem being sung one-another.

I always understood "in all thy Son's command" to mean that the country was in obedience to Christ. But all the other references to thee and thou in the song are clearly about Canada and not about God.

Six year old me saw "thy Son" and also  "see thee rise" and figured biblically loaded language meant biblical intent, and then I just didn't think about it for forty years, until today.

1 minute ago, johnzo said:

I always understood "in all thy Son's command" to mean that the country was in obedience to Christ. But all the other references to thee and thou in the song are clearly about Canada and not about God.

Six year old me saw "thy Son" and also  "see thee rise" and figured biblically loaded language meant biblical intent, and then I just didn't think about it for forty years, until today.

That's cool.

 

I think my view was shaped by French immersion. The anthem is sung to the country (as if it were a person) or at least that's how I interpreted it.

Here are the French lyrics, translated to English (from Wikipedia):

O Canada!
Land of our ancestors
Glorious deeds circle your brow
For your arm knows how to wield the sword
Your arm knows how to carry the cross;
Your history is an epic
Of brilliant deeds
And your valour steeped in faith
Will protect our homes and our rights,
Will protect our homes and our rights.

The French version of the anthem absolutely destroys the English version, IMO.