I've been doing this for 87 years now...

It would be interesting to see who would be president now if presidents could stay in office for an unlimited number of terms, as in Canada.

William Lyon MacKenzie King was Prime Minister of Canada for 22 years! :eek:

I think if there were unlimited terms, we would no longer be addressing our leader as "Mr. President" but rather "Herr Fuhrer" after a while.

Yea unlimited terms are a bad idea even considering such celebrity presidents as Clinton.

But what about a perfect president (pretty well impossible, I know)? He makes world peace, makes the entire world rich enough to have everything they want, makes everyone happy?

Theoretically at least, true democracy should always put the best available leader into position. I know the perfect president idea is a bit out-there, but shouldn't the leader who represents the majority of the country's support be able to run until he falls out of favour with the majority?

Blasphemous though this may seem, I think the US could stand to be divided up into a couple, or few, different countries, such a New England, West Coast, Middle (judging by the electoral map anyways). Canada could certainly benefit from the same, as the needs and wants of different areas create huge clashes and compromises...

i wouldnt mind having presidents in office for more than four years. I would gladly have voted for clinton over bush. Franlkin Roosevelt was elected four consecutive terms before he died

Being a Canadian, I can tell you unlimited terms is a bad, bad idea. Limiting them keeps fresh ideas in the office, not the same old grumpy bastards scratching their balls over the same debates for 30 years.

Being a Canadian, I can tell you unlimited terms is a bad, bad idea. Limiting them keeps fresh ideas in the office, not the same old grumpy bastards scratching their balls over the same debates for 30 years.


lmao

Being a Canadian, I can tell you unlimited terms is a bad, bad idea. Limiting them keeps fresh ideas in the office, not the same old grumpy bastards scratching their balls over the same debates for 30 years.

Yeah I'm Canadian too, but I don't see a problem with the current system. I think if it were limited, the new candidates that would come along would still be old grumpy bastards, it's just they'd be former finance ministers (;)) and the like instead of life-long Prime Ministerial candidates...

mmm, corrupt former finance ministers.

Something you have to take into consideration is that, with limited terms, you spend your first term pussy-footing, trying to get some political objectives completed while at the same time always campaigning for re-election, while on your second term you can actual get done what you intended to to begin with, and don't need to worry about re-election. Whereas with unlimited terms, you're always campaigning.

They should get done what they intended in the 1st term and use that as campaigning for the 2nd tho...

But what about a perfect president (pretty well impossible, I know)? He makes world peace, makes the entire world rich enough to have everything they want, makes everyone happy?

then the president would have solved the worlds problems and its time for him to retire.

Theoretically at least, true democracy should always put the best available leader into position.
in theory, democracy only puts the most popular person in office. read plato.

Blasphemous though this may seem, I think the US could stand to be divided up into a couple, or few, different countries, such a New England, West Coast, Middle (judging by the electoral map anyways)
as long as texas gets to be its own country, im all for it. we're so much better than the rest of the nation.

They should get done what they intended in the 1st term and use that as campaigning for the 2nd tho...


In theory man, in theory... But, honestly, can you tell me that's how they actually do it?

i used "should" for a reason :).


Theoretically at least, true democracy should always put the best available leader into position.
in theory, democracy only puts the most popular person in office. read plato.

Yes, that is why Bush is here this term, but that theory didn't apply in 00

in theory, democracy only puts the most popular person in office. read plato.


True, but the most popular candidate should, in theory (this is getting out of control, haha), be the best available leader for the people...

Hitler was real popular to germany at the time...

Time magazine named hitler man of the year, it wasn't just Germany that liked him.

I hear Ford was a big fan also!

Time magazine named hitler man of the year, it wasn't just Germany that liked him.

MotY is based on influence, not popularity

Hitler was real popular to germany at the time...

And Bush is real popular to America now... :p

You said it not I lol.

And Bush is real popular to America now... :p

LOL Stole the words right out of my mouth...:lol2:

I don't know about real popular. 52% popular.

I don't know about real popular. 52% popular.

True, but it was a humourous observation.

I find it ironic that the country that claims glory ending the great wars and ending tyranny is now the world's main warmonger...:thumbsdow

Its just us sticking our nose in other peoples troubles.

True, but it was a humourous observation.

I find it ironic that the country that claims glory ending the great wars and ending tyranny is now the world's main warmonger...:thumbsdow

What do you expect. We were getting bored.

One small consolation from all this mess...at least that idiot Bush wasn't in office when the commies were a significant opponent.There would most likely be nuclear bomb-shaped craters all over America and Eastern Europe by now if he were.All in the name of self-defence ,of course.

:iagree:

Being a Canadian, I can tell you unlimited terms is a bad, bad idea. Limiting them keeps fresh ideas in the office, not the same old grumpy bastards scratching their balls over the same debates for 30 years.


Exactly thats how Canada got stuck with dumbass jean chretian for so long....

Exactly thats how Canada got stuck with dumbass jean chretian for so long....

Funny,I thought it would have been due to his being re-elected by the people of Canada in 1997 and 2000...........

....and if you are going to call someone a dumbass,it helps if you spell their name correctly.That way you don't end up looking like a dumbass yourself.

I liked Jean. He was just a normal guy - only 2 of each 10 times you saw him on TV was he formally dressed, other times he was waterskiing, golfing, shopping in regular malls with his wife, etc. At least he had character, and he certainly did nothing really wrong (very few things at least).

I hear Ford was a big fan also!

Preston Bush as well :iceslolan

Chretien was an excellent prime minister. His only real failing was being too easily influenced by the US, that and being a little too friendly to corporations, but then again he was trying to entice more big business to come to Canada. Clinton and Chretien in power together were a boon for business, and both our countries enjoyed nearly a decade of prosperity because of it.

But let me guess, that was really the work of Reagan and Mulroney, right? :uhoh:

Chretien was an excellent prime minister. His only real failing was being too easily influenced by the US, that and being a little too friendly to corporations, but then again he was trying to entice more big business to come to Canada.


He was too easily influened by the United States up until his final term, in which he simply stated he would not follow the states into Iraq, because there was no real reason to. That was one of the first times I was truly proud that he was our Prime Minister.

At least he had character, and he certainly did nothing really wrong (very few things at least).

What about all his promises about GST??! GST is a bullshit tax we shouldnt be paying. And thats 7% on EVERYTHING we buy! Chretian is a liberal asshole who lied about everything. Look at the state of the canadian military, its a joke. Little countries 1/10th Canadas size have more powerful militaries. And Canada spits all over the united states when they ask for help... but rely on them to come to the rescue if anything happens. And dont tell me its because we take care of things domestically more cause i see more homeless people on the streets in Toronto than I do in New York




Clinton and Chretien in power together were a boon for business, and both our countries enjoyed nearly a decade of prosperity because of it.



See that is how Clinton and Chretien fooled everybody into thinking they were such great presidents/prime ministers. That duo in power isn't what made the economy so good... it was a little thing called the internet that came along during the tech boom boosting the economy and stock market to great levels. That would have happened no matter who was in office.

So I'm not crazy. I'm not the only one who thinks that presidents/prime ministers are not the sole cause of a good or bad economy like so many others do.


Well actually that doesn't mean I'm not crazy. That just means that if I am I have company.

What about all his promises about GST??! GST is a bullshit tax we shouldnt be paying. And thats 7% on EVERYTHING we buy!Ok. Take it away, and the government can pay for even less than they already can, and go further into debt. Either that, or they tax us some more in some other way.Look at the state of the canadian military, its a joke. Little countries 1/10th Canadas size have more powerful militaries.That I honestly don't care about - we should be peaceful and humble rather than intimidating. Also, take away GST, and now the government has even less money, and the military gets even smaller.And Canada spits all over the united states when they ask for help... but rely on them to come to the rescue if anything happens.Perhaps. I can't honestly say I know because I don't typically follow current events. Please, could you give me two recent examples (other than the war in Iraq, which should have never happened) of instances where we didn't help the US when they requested help, and give me two recent examples of Canada relying on the US to fix a problem of ours?I'm not the only one who thinks that presidents/prime ministers are not the sole cause of a good or bad economy like so many others do.:iagree: In fact I'd say they are usually less than half of the cause...

:iagree:

Ok. Take it away, and the government can pay for even less than they already can, and go further into debt. Either that, or they tax us some more in some other way.

See thats exactly the point... thats how Liberal governments make you think. That's why they get re-elected. You think of all the problems that would happen if they took it away.... but the REAL problem is WHY DID THEY PUT IT THERE? That just created ALL of those problems. But stupid canadian voters think they're doing a good job, because they just lie and lie and lie. Look at tax rates in the states they're HALF of what they are in Canada. And they don't seem to be having any more problems then we do...

It's the Canadian government's fault that if they take away the tax they wont be able to pay for as much. Other countries even PROVINCES (like Alberta) are handling it because thats the way it should be. The liberal government CREATED the GST, and they LIED and said it would be temporary. Jean Chretien was such a great prime minister that he PROMISED to get rid of the GST on 2 re-elections. But did it happen? No.... he lied to the Canadian public once again.




That I honestly don't care about - we should be peaceful and humble rather than intimidating. Also, take away GST, and now the government has even less money, and the military gets even smaller.

I never said anything about intimidating... its not even about that. It's about the Canadian military being a JOKE. They've hit rock bottom, the only way they can go is up. They have 50 year old helicopters, used subs blowing up.... its honestly a joke.
Look at countries like switzerland, they're not intimidating, but they have a competent army. And they're the size of like Nova Scotia. We should have a DECENT army, i'm not saying we should have an army on scale of America's. But just a DECENT one... one that Canada can atleast defend itself with for more than an hour without the help of the United States.

And the GST isn't meant for military purposes, its not even supposed to be here now. But thats what you get for trusting liberals... that GST money goes right in their pockets. Why do you think other countries have half the tax, and are on the same level as Canada? Because the Canadian government steals that money and doesn't use it effectively.



and about canada not helping the states.... i wasnt talking about how Canada didn't help in Iraq. When i was talking about Canadians spitting on the states and expecting them to protect Canada. I meant the Canadian mentality, ALOT of Canadians mentality is like "fuck the States" "we're better" etc. etc. But what if some country attacked Canada, those people would be eating their words and begging the United States to protect us. (Which they would ofcourse do)


http://www.kimshippey.com/clarkhoskin/pics/jean.jpg

And they don't seem to be having any more problems then we do...

America's not having more problems than Canada?! :lol2: :screwy:

Yeesh you're getting awfully offensive about this...and you're even assuming I'm a liberal, which I'm not at all. I just happened to like Chretien as a person.

Look at tax rates in the states they're HALF of what they are in Canada. And they don't seem to be having any more problems then we do...

:eek7::lol2:

Canadian net federal debt: ~$501,493,000,000
U.S. net federal debt: ~$$7,429,883,824,960

The reason the U.S. does not seem to be in any more trouble than us is because they are better positioned to finance that debt - business is far more prosperous in the U.S. than in Canada, so foreign countries continue to invest and trade. However, the U.S. has been noting a decline in this, thus one of the reasons why the Canadian dollar is so strong in relation to the U.S. dollar right now - think the Canadian dollar has been doing well? Nope, barely changed a bit - it's just the U.S. dollar value is going down, in order to attract foreign investors and traders so that the U.S. can continue to spend. In the long run, they are on a very bad, bad course, and they're going to need to climb out of the hole they're digging themselves into. Canada, on the other hand, posted a seventh consecutive year of surplus, paying down our debt...

So the U.S. may pay half the tax we do, but they're in more than twice the trouble...

...and they LIED and said it would be temporary. Jean Chretien was such a great prime minister that he PROMISED to get rid of the GST on 2 re-elections. But did it happen? No.... he lied to the Canadian public once again.

This, it burns me to say, is unfortunately irrelevant, as every politician lies. Why? Because fixing our problems is nasty yet must be done - however, no one would elect someone who said "I'm going to increase tax in order to fix Canada's problems." Instead, they must lie to get themselves in the boss's chair, and then set about fixing our problems.


..military being a JOKE...And the GST isn't meant for military purposes...

I'll agree it's pathetic, and could use some beefing up. However, it's one of the furthest things from my mind when it comes to considering our country's leader...I'm a lover not a fighter :D

The GST isn't directly meant for military purposes, no, but in order to improve, they need more money, and if they don't get it through GST then it's through some other tax. You can't just avoid paying for it and hope it gets bigger and better.

and about canada not helping the states.... i wasnt talking about how Canada didn't help in Iraq. When i was talking about Canadians spitting on the states and expecting them to protect Canada. I meant the Canadian mentality, ALOT of Canadians mentality is like "fuck the States" "we're better" etc. etc. But what if some country attacked Canada, those people would be eating their words and begging the United States to protect us. (Which they would ofcourse do)

Maybe so, maybe not. Neither of us can tell what Canadians would do in that situation. However, your region must be very anti-American, as I certainly don't see people around me "spitting" on the U.S. Also, what does this have to do with Chretien, anyways?

Yeesh you're getting awfully offensive about this...and you're even assuming I'm a liberal, which I'm not at all. I just happened to like Chretien as a person.

I'm not offended, and i dont assume you're a liberal. I just HATE Chretien. And i think Canadian voters are blind sheep, i dont know why they continued to re-elect that asshole


:eek7::lol2:

Canadian net federal debt: ~$501,493,000,000
U.S. net federal debt: ~$$7,429,883,824,960

The reason the U.S. does not seem to be in any more trouble than us is because they are better positioned to finance that debt - business is far more prosperous in the U.S. than in Canada, so foreign countries continue to invest and trade. However, the U.S. has been noting a decline in this, thus one of the reasons why the Canadian dollar is so strong in relation to the U.S. dollar right now - think the Canadian dollar has been doing well? Nope, barely changed a bit - it's just the U.S. dollar value is going down, in order to attract foreign investors and traders so that the U.S. can continue to spend. In the long run, they are on a very bad, bad course, and they're going to need to climb out of the hole they're digging themselves into. Canada, on the other hand, posted a seventh consecutive year of surplus, paying down our debt...

So the U.S. may pay half the tax we do, but they're in more than twice the trouble...


True.. but i wasnt really talking about debts. I was talking about how life is for the average joe. Average earnings are higher in america and look at the unemployment level, much better than in canada. And if anybody can dig themselves out of hole its America, they run the world anywhere you'll go you'll see McDonalds, Nike shoes, american movies, etc. And almost every country wants to do trade with america.


This, it burns me to say, is unfortunately irrelevant, as every politician lies. Why? Because fixing our problems is nasty yet must be done - however, no one would elect someone who said "I'm going to increase tax in order to fix Canada's problems." Instead, they must lie to get themselves in the boss's chair, and then set about fixing our problems.

The fact is it isn't irrelevent... because he introduced it and promised to get rid of it. He flat out PROMISED several times, yet people continue re-electing him. When other people could have done a better job. And many Liberal politicians talk about increasing taxes, and thats what canadians seem to like. Increasing taxes for health care, for education, etc. They have enough money they just dont use it effectively


Maybe so, maybe not. Neither of us can tell what Canadians would do in that situation. However, your region must be very anti-American, as I certainly don't see people around me "spitting" on the U.S. Also, what does this have to do with Chretien, anyways?

I can guarantee you 100% not even 99.9% that that is what would happen. America would come to the rescue cause Canada couldnt defend itself. I'm not saying everybody flat out Hates america. But the general Canadian attitude is, Canadians are better than Americans. Yet if something happened they would have to rely on America for help.




97CamaroRS: I said America doesn't have MUCH more problems than Canada. The United States is almost 10 times bigger than Canada, so they have to deal with 10 times the amount of problems. Yet relative to Canada they dont have much more problems, they have to deal with the same shit.

I'm not offended, and i dont assume you're a liberal. I just HATE Chretien. And i think Canadian voters are blind sheep, i dont know why they continued to re-elect that asshole

Sorry, I guess I mis-worded that, I meant that you were getting very offensive, as opposed to defensive, about the subject. Hating Chretien is fair enough, and is a fair enough reason not to support him. However, lots of other people do like him, and have exercised their right to vote for him - doesn't mean they're blind sheep, just means they like him, or at the least, like him better than the other candidates (or perhaps candidate, as anyone other than the conservatives doesn't really stand much chance).

True.. but i wasnt really talking about debts. I was talking about how life is for the average joe. Average earnings are higher in america and look at the unemployment level, much better than in canada.

Well, life for them being the way it is causing their deep debt, which is, eventually at least, a major problem. As far as unemployment goes, you have to consider that more than anything, it's individual provinces and territories raising the rate - consider Newfoundland, where a primary industry is fishing, and because of they climate, they can not fish year-round. Therefore, in the winter months, the unemployment rate dramatically increases, which has an effect on the annual rate. Also consider the territories - I have no idea what they do there, but I can't imagine it being much...

Increasing taxes for health care, for education, etc.

The key - people don't really want higher taxes, but they do want to make sure that our health care and education systems improve or at least are sustained.

America would come to the rescue cause Canada couldnt defend itself. I'm not saying everybody flat out Hates america. But the general Canadian attitude is, Canadians are better than Americans.

Likely true they would come to the rescue, but don't they already do that with everyone?

Again, regarding the Canadian view of America, I think that may be regional, since in New Brunswick at least, mostly everyone likes the U.S.

Again, regarding the Canadian view of America, I think that may be regional, since in New Brunswick at least, mostly everyone likes the U.S.


yeah... i dont mean people dont like the US. Its like a superiority thing, Canadians just seem to think they're better for some reason.

But its the same way in the States... USA is #1 to the people that live there


And about the taxes on health care and education.... they shouldn't be raising taxes to sustain those things. All they have to do is more effectively use the funds.