And they're off...the election thread

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
No.

I have every sympathy for seniors. I am one. But to vote on that, single issue is absurd. There are much, much bigger decisions to be made. But that's how many people vote - on one issue that touches them.

And that's why politicians don't say much in all their election meetings.
 
This leaves out any concern for the future ... our children? And thus are greed screws eM too ...

But if you deny logic ... we could leave thoughts out of the domain of emotions ... thus the, or 'a' void theory! Makes things appear as IT isn't ... metaphysical manifestations?
 
ChemGal said:
What about a family like mine?
Click to expand...
I don't know enough details to give specifics. Income splitting for families kicks in for two adults with one or more child(ren). If it is helpful depends on income levels of the two adults, and the differential between them. COuples without children--doesn't apply (unless they are pensioners, then the pension splittign comes into play). Single parent families--doesn't apply.
 
GordW said:
I don't know enough details to give specifics. Income splitting for families kicks in for two adults with one or more child(ren). If it is helpful depends on income levels of the two adults, and the differential between them. COuples without children--doesn't apply (unless they are pensioners, then the pension splittign comes into play). Single parent families--doesn't apply.
Click to expand...
That's based on who can income split.
I think it would make sense if we were able to, but we are not. So many benefits and tax breaks are based on household income, yet what we have to pay is not.
 
One thing is guaranteed ... the higher powers will not lower themselves to assist the lesser powers of scattered chit ... them who have the eternal wisdom buried within ... a subtlety of God as devious or otherwise demonizing presence that haunts the presence ... one has to probe the past spirits to conceive of the future --- Charles what's heis name ...
 
GordW said:
I don't know enough details to give specifics. Income splitting for families kicks in for two adults with one or more child(ren). If it is helpful depends on income levels of the two adults, and the differential between them. COuples without children--doesn't apply (unless they are pensioners, then the pension splittign comes into play). Single parent families--doesn't apply.
Click to expand...


Gord, are you sure of your facts? "Couples without children doesn't apply."
A couple (no children) - one person earns a good income putting her in a high tax bracket; spouse either does not work (various reasons- poor health, desire to pursue a hobby, volunteer work, unable to find suitable employment, or just doesn't like work) or earns very little. Wouldn't they qualify under Harper's new income splitting?
 
Seeler said:
Gord, are you sure of your facts? "Couples without children doesn't apply."
A couple (no children) - one person earns a good income putting her in a high tax bracket; spouse either does not work (various reasons- poor health, desire to pursue a hobby, volunteer work, unable to find suitable employment, or just doesn't like work) or earns very little. Wouldn't they qualify under Harper's new income splitting?
Click to expand...
No, under the one that was done it was for those with kids only. A family like Chemguy and I wouldn't qualify. I think income splitting should be expanded, I've seen quite a few posts against income splitting and I don't understand why it's seen so negatively.
 
ChemGal said:
No, under the one that was done it was for those with kids only. A family like Chemguy and I wouldn't qualify. I think income splitting should be expanded, I've seen quite a few posts against income splitting and I don't understand why it's seen so negatively.
Click to expand...
apart from the fact that the current model benefits relatively few and then not the ones who could use the extra cash the most, arguably in the current economic climate it is unaffordable
 
ChemGal said:
http://www.jjmccullough.com/elizabethmay.html
May is worse than I thought when it comes to the pseudo-science stuff. Chemtrails is going quite extreme IMO. I'd much rather have Harper over her.
Click to expand...

CHEMTRAILING
Chemtrailing is the publics term for the CLASSIFIED ONGOING artificial modification of Earths climate systems using reflective nano-materials (aerosols) to reflect sunlight. The aerosols are dispersed via jet aircraft trails that expand into reflective artificial clouds.
Eradicating Programmed Ignorance: The Geo-engineering of Planet Earth
August 31, 2015
TLBTV-E4.jpg


Populations around the globe have been relentlessly programmed to ignore their own sense of reason in exchange for the official narrative of reality. The most glaring and dire example of conditioned denial exists in the public's apathy toward the climate engineering atrocities occurring in our skies. The Liberty Beacon addresses this conditioned form of blindness in the following article.
Dane Wigington
geoengineeringwatch.org
 
@UnDefinitive are chemtrails and chemtrailing supposed to be the same thing?
The definition for chemtrails I'm aware of is this one that wikipedia uses:
According to the chemtrail conspiracy theory, long-lasting trails left in the sky by high-flying aircraft are chemical or biological agents deliberately sprayed for sinister purposes undisclosed to the general public
Click to expand...

Chemtrailing is a new term to me.
 
Do characters of DNA and complex amino acids fall into that bracket of emotionalism?

The general/corporeal disturbance of the Cosmos by relativistic means? IE stuff we don't understand ... dissociative subtleties?

Thus collapse theory ....
 
No sinister purposes, necessarily. The theory is that this is an attempt at weather manipulation, possibly an attempt to mitigate the melanoma epidemic that has accompanied our ozone thinning activities.

The thing that sets off my bulls**t detectors is that, if this is happening, and it's for a purported good purpose, governments wouldn't be hiding it, but bragging about it (you know - "we've increased our drought resistance by 4%, our melanoma incidence has dropped by 10%", etc.).
 
Now if transport by train was used instead of plane ... emissions would drop by about a factor of 10 ... and the oli Barons would be deprived ... and they would project wales that the market place was collapsing ... it is all connected to money or Monis!

We exist for money and not to learn ... thus we loose it ...

Scientific brights as prescience about the lights going out down there ?
 
Yes, but we've torn up so many rail lines. It's really too bad. I had an uncle in England as a child who was a huge train buff. He loved to spend time with the train schedues to work out a different way for me to come up to see him (in the Lake District, from Liverpool) a different way every time. Often, it required sprinting from platform to platform with minutes to spare...
 
Hove you ever pondered the European trend to re-establish common gauge rail lines ... and barge services that are patiently sloe-Eire? Industrial sharpies don't get efficiency versus efficacy ... sloe is ineffable in their world and thus temper pharos and floors me ... as light departed ... the Shadow reins ...

But we could cultivate a desire to learn ...
 
ChemGal said:
No, under the one that was done it was for those with kids only. A family like Chemguy and I wouldn't qualify. I think income splitting should be expanded, I've seen quite a few posts against income splitting and I don't understand why it's seen so negatively.
Click to expand...

Thank you for clarifying that for me.
 
Someone up thread said dont vote on one issue

But we all vote for random reasons.

Many have an irrational hated of Harper. That reason will have you vote for someone else

I could never votte NDP until they abolilsh their position on Quebec separation. Right now with a charismatic PQ leader it is far too great a risk for me.

I could never vote for boy child Justin. I despise his rise to fame of his fathers fortunes. And lots of other reasons

People will vote based on any number of one off policies. We only hear what the tv or news shows us. We get snap shots. And really most people are too busy running their own lives to delve any deeper.

Interestingly, as usual, anyone not voting NDP or Liberal on this site is deemed some sort of dinosaur.

I commented on a friends face book post that i couldnt vote for Justin. She sent me a clip that was on the news last night about the idiot peeing in a cup. A reason to not Vote conservative

But last month, i didnt bother sending her a clip about the 21 year old racist dropped by the liberrals for her past face book postings. It isnt pertinent to the campaign when these oddities pop up to me. But somehow it condems the Conservatives for her
 
I won't be voting Conservative. They are not supportive of scientists when they muzzle them, cancel water and environmental impact monitoring, and fire them if they do speak up. Alberta is really funny right now. People voted all over the map provincially and the sky didn't fall on our heads the way the Conservatives predicted. So there may be a few brave ridings other than Edmonton going elsewhere than Harper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top