HA! Good comeback Tom.
Actually I think both sides are to blame for way to much use of "twisted" numbers.
Guardian said:
Absolutely! The government has proven, again and again, that it has plenty of money to throw around. $2 billion for the gun registry, $5 billion on this daycare program, $4.5 billion for NDP support - that's $11.5 billion right there, and I'm not even trying. That would cover $10 000 for each of 1 million kids. But we'd have to have a sea change in government here in Canada to have that happen - we'd need a smaller government with the attitude that we can actually [gasp!!] TRUST citizens to look after themselves. I've got no problems with a social safety net, but when the government starts trying to raise our kids for us, then it's too activist.
Ok agreed for the most part on that. However, why do you keep seeing these possable daycares as "government" education centers instead of just places where daycare professionals can take care of kids on a level playing field as far as earning, standards and care are concerned? If you where so worried about what is being taught in school, then you wouldn't even have your kids IN school, considering those are (provincial) government run.
As opposed to our declining birthrate lessening demand for this new daycare system?
Ok have to fall into this one. Whats wrong with our declining birth rate? Its actually starting to happen worldwide as more and more countries become "westernized" and people start making the decisions to use birth control and/or choosing not to have kids. I would consider it more of the pendulum swinging back the other way after hundreds of years of unchecked procreation.
My choice of words was not flippant - it was intentional. I see a rather disturbing trend in social work and education to inculcate children with "values" that their parents may not share, and I think that the daycare system is going to turn into an excuse to buy children away from their parents so they don't wind up having their values shaped by gun-lovin' baccy-chewin' racist homophobic rednecks. If we don't show them the right path, they might even grow up and vote Conservative!! We must act now!!! Instead, the Government's enlightened educational committees will craft a suitably fuzzy and warm curriculum for these kids. Given this government's ethical standards, darn right I'm scared of this idea.
I realized that, and I think your looking at things from a rather paranoid point. I know, as I have done so myself a few times on this board. As for being scared of something, I would say the "gun-lovin' baccy-chewin' racist homophobic rednecks" scare the crap out of me. But then if it was proven to me that the government was going into "child re-education" for the purposes of turning out little left wing nuts, I too would be afraid of that as well. Think for themselves, and question everything is what I say.
As for abuse in private-run daycares, that's what standards and enforcement is for. The problem is that socially activist governments, because they focus overwhelmingly on individual rights and freedoms, lose sight of the values of personal responsibility, social duty, and the right of society to be protected from crime. That's why socialists are soft on crime, while it's conservatives who call for tougher enforcement and punishment (and support cops, armies, and so on). Until Canada as a whole gets tougher on criminals, and prison is again a thing to be avoided, we can't talk about standards and enforcement. Again, we need a change in governmental philosophy.
Wait a second? If they are focusing overwhelmingly on individual rights and freedoms, losing sight of the values of personal responsibility, social duty, and the right of society to be protected from crime, and you (generalize as right wingers) guys are spouting the same thing, how in hell are you so far apart? I agree that each focuses more on one thing as opposed to another, but thats crazy. More social thinking people are not necessarily soft on crime as opposed to soft (naive) on people who have either got a bum rap, or they see hope in rehabilitation. They realize (most do) that these things are not always right and you have to be tough sometimes. As for prison being a place to be avoided, even with a death sentence, hard labour, and whippings every night, you will not get rid of crime. Their will always be people, for one reason or another, who chose that path.
I give you HRDC, the gun registry, NDHQ / DND, Public Works.... Government's record is, if anything, worse.
In many cases I agree. It doesn't happen in all cases however. (Public works) Deregulation of power, water, etc has proven to be far more costly to the consumer then when regulated by government.
Well, I may not be a parent yet, but I have five younger siblings, the youngest of whom is still in elementary school. I think I do understand about keeping kids safe, thank you very much. And when I'm a parent, I'd like to ensure their safety myself, thank you very much, by choosing for myself how they will be raised - instead of trusting a government that puts killers and pedophiles back on the street after only a few years in prison, that has dragged its heels on a sexual assaulter registry for years...
Couldn't agree more. It pisses me off that a child cannot go outside without having to wear a helmet (exaggerated I know), or be under the watchful eye of a paranoid parent. I don't believe that it is governments fault on crime that makes people feel this way as opposed to the news media pumping up everyones fears over a few isolated incidents. Give kids proper boundaries, and they'll do fine. Push on them to cause you to go grey sometimes, but for the more part they do alright. The idea of a grade 1 student walking two blocks to school nowadays is just unheard of. Its a shame.
My whole point is this. Give parents the means to raise their kids themselves, and ensure they have choices - isn't that what democracy's all about? We're starting down the road to a Canada Health Act-type monopoly for child care - that's not giving choices! And your points about lower income families carry very little weight with me, when I consider the tax burden they're under and how those taxes are spent. Stop wasting those families' money and give it back to them, I say.
Actually most low income earners are not taxed at all in many fields. In fact they get quite a bit of money. My family (Single mom) would never been able to survive if it wasn't that way.
Also, I don't know yet. But is this idea of daycare the same as medicare where you cannot have privately run daycares? Or is it a two tied system right off the bat?
As for Democracy. I wish Kirkhill were around more. He's the poli-sci boy. But I believe that democracy (as we know it) is what you would call "mob" rule.
Andyboy said:
Pretty crazy right? Well except for politicians we as a society generally rely on evidence other than anecdotal as proof of something being true. Other than your posts I have nothing to back that statement up and there is a good chance that very few people are going to believe me.
You rely on evidence? The problem is, what evidence? If I may even scratch the topic of global warming, which I don't even want to go there, then it would seem that evidence is the last thing that you want. People with ideas want the evidence to prove THEIR ideas correct. When it doesn't, they either make up the numbers, or come up with "evidence" that refutes the accepted ideas. So it comes down to whichever side can throw the most "evidence" out there to make people believe one side or the other. Occasionally some evidence comes along that is so clear that everyone (except the hardline fringe) actually has to accept it. And that happens rarely.