Page 4 of 4
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:06 am
by [xeno]Julios
kewl - thx for the thoughts.
been reading more about the green party's philosophy here:
http://www.green.ca/challenge_goal.html ... 112:3.html
I figure if I'm gonna vote for them, I should try to learn about them, unlike last time where i just blindly voted for 'em
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:29 am
by Massive Quasars
Is the Green party opposed to GM foods and generally luddite leaning?
Of the criticisms levelled against stereotypical environmentalists is that they've co-opted socialist luddite policies to the detriment of the movement. I think there is something to those claims having read environmentalist group blogs that deify nature and equate environmentalism with religion.
edit:
[xeno]Julios wrote:I figure if I'm gonna vote for them, I should try to learn about them, unlike last time where i just blindly voted for 'em
Maybe I'm asking the wrong person.
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:24 pm
by GONNAFISTYA
Fuckin Canadians having a constructive discussion about the various party's politics and what they stand for.
Can't you just do it like the Yanks and vote for the guy who spent the most money on his campaign?
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 12:25 pm
by MKJ
or the guy who looks the best on a carrier
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 3:15 pm
by shadd_
has the green party changed their stance on nuclear energy since the last election?
they wanted to abolish nuclear totally. not a wise choice. we have too much to gain from nuclear technology in general to give up now.
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:43 pm
by [xeno]Julios
from their page:
Energy
Less is More
When it comes to energy, we can build more power plants and create more pollution, or we can take steps to rebuild factories, renovate homes, refit businesses, redesign products, reassess priorities and reduce waste.
Power plants are very expensive and require a lot of imported machinery. Conservation activities, on the other hand, match local know-how with sustained effort and they create many more jobs per dollar of public spending.
Our three-step program will:
Reduce energy demands and create good jobs through conservation and efficiency measures.
Develop renewable and alternative energy sources to phase out fossil fuel and nuclear power within fifty years.
Focus on future energy and soft energy technologies.
http://www.greenparty.ca/article33.html
I wonder what they mean by phasing out. And what sort of sacrifices would need to be made to allow for the reductions in energy consumption?
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 10:44 pm
by Massive Quasars
Conservation is nice but even with improvements in efficiency and reduced wastefulness, energy demands will continue to rise indefinitely. That doesn't mean our demand for energy will indefinitely pollute and destroy the environment, though.
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:37 pm
by Canidae
GONNAFISTYA wrote:Fuckin Canadians having a constructive discussion about the various party's politics and what they stand for.
Can't you just do it like the Yanks and vote for the guy who spent the most money on his campaign?
And not one mention of the MaryJane party or the Rhinos either...
Posted: Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:29 am
by hax103
GONNAFISTYA wrote:Fuckin Canadians having a constructive discussion about the various party's politics and what they stand for.
Can't you just do it like the Yanks and vote for the guy who spent the most money on his campaign?
The corrupt Canadian government falls and you try to bring in the Yanks?
Weak.
Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:12 am
by Massive Quasars
Harper could be our next PM. Oh well.
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:54 am
by shadd_
my god, it could happen.
if he's gonna be anything at all like mike harris, watch the fuck out. the only thing that left ontario with any semblance of canada was the fact we had a little federal help to fall back on.
however i saw a little program on polls and how they have changed from the past. pollsters can get as high as 90% refusal rate in participation. basically they are shit and cannot be trusted at all.
@MQ, have you been paying attention to the ipperwash inquiry?(harris related)