i'm glad you did this. now, let's see how close you are...

q1: "How involved should the Canadian military be in the fight against ISIS?"

see, this is a bad question to start off with. i know that if i say i want to be more involved, it's going to tell me to vote for the conservatives. but, i want to be more involved in a way that is very different than what the conservatives are suggesting.

isis are bad guys. really bad guys. but bombing people isn't how you get rid of bad guys in this area of the world. it's how you create blowback.

i certainly don't want to be less involved - i'm not an isolationist.

so, i'll have to say "i don't know" - even though i know exactly what i want.

q2: "How supportive should Canada be of Israel?"

this is again a very badly worded question. but, in this case, constructing the context means i definitely want to say "much less" - even though it's not technically, exactly true.

q3: "How much should Canada spend on foreign aid?"

well, quantity is less important to me than quality. we need to manage this better more than we need to just increase the number. but, broadly speaking, i think we can do more - even if that doesn't mean spending more.

q4: "Quebec should be formally recognized as a nation in the Constitution."

i don't know. ask quebeckers. seems irrelevant and sort of childish.

q5: "Quebec should become an independent state."

well, definitely not. i realize it's not my choice. but, i'm willing to try and plead with them that this is not in their best interests.

q6: "First Nations should have more control over their ancestral territory."

absolutely. but, this is not an election issue. it falls entirely to the courts due to what is a jurisdictional hole after patriation.

q7: "How much should the government do to make amends for past treatment of First Nations?"

again, this is an issue for the courts. broadly speaking, they should do more.

q8: "To what extent should law enforcement be able to monitor the online activity of Canadians?"

without a warrant? they should not be able to monitor any online activity at all.

q9: "Longer prison sentences are the best way to prevent crime."

this is an empirically false statement.

q10: "Handguns should be banned in Canada."

i hate guns. but i know that gun control is largely a canard. i'd support very stringent licensing requirements that are restricted almost entirely to employment purposes. and, i wouldn't include police officers in the list of exemptions, either. but, it's the very first steps towards coming to a real solution, not the solution in and of itself.

q11: "Government workers should not be allowed to strike."

lol. they're not trying to pretend they can pass that without the supreme court striking it down, are they?

q12: "How much power should unions have?"

this question is incoherent. you don't allow entities to have power. entities take power. this is a perpetual struggle.

q13: "Canada should introduce a publicly funded childcare program."

i like the idea of publicly funded ece, but i don't think that's on the table. daycare, itself? i don't care.

q14: "No new oil pipelines should be built in Canada."

strongly agree. and, they should keep it in the ground, too.

q15: "The Canadian government should put a price on carbon."

it depends. carbon trading is a bank scam, but carbon taxes are potentially a good way to change behaviour, if targetted at corporations rather than consumers. i don't think anybody's talking about carbon taxes this time around. so, again, i have to say "i don't know" - even though i know exactly what i think.

q16: "How much should Canada do to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions?"

all the things.

q17: "How much tax should corporations pay?"

about twice as much. seriously.

q18: "How much should wealthier people pay in taxes?"

well, corporations are people, right? so, they should be taxed like people.

q19: "Abortions should be allowed in all cases, regardless of the reason."

my technical position is that it's none of my business.

q20: "Terminally ill patients should be able to end their own lives with medical assistance."

none of my business.

q21: "Possession of marijuana should be a criminal offence."

of course not.

q22: "How much of a role should the private sector have in health care?"

this is again a very badly worded question. the private sector does almost everything in health care, but they charge a series of insurance monopolies. so, i'm going to assume that they're talking about private insurance, and say absolutely none at all. but, that doesn't mean i'm opposed to a private office that only accepts the provincial health insurance.

q23: "Illicit drug users should have access to safe injection sites."

this reduces health care expenditures on related illnesses.

q24: "How many new immigrants should Canada admit?"

i think that the policies should be more directly targeted towards social needs. it's not a question of more or less. it's a question of better management.

q25: "How much should be done to accommodate religious minorities in Canada?"

courts.

"Canada's budget should be balanced no matter what."

this is absurd.

"The most effective way to create jobs in Canada is to lower taxes."

this is also an empirically false statement.

"Canada should end its ties to the monarchy."

yeah. i'd rather get rid of the governor-general than the senate.

"Only those who speak both English and French should be appointed to the Supreme Court."

this is a functional job requirement. they're required to look at issues in both languages. how is this an election issue? it's basic common sense.

"The Senate should be abolished."

no. we need to reform it to act in it's stated purpose.

yeah, this is awful. voter be very aware.

www.cbc.ca/news/politics/vote-compass-2015-canada-election-1.3204489

obgii
Always appreciate your posts and the reasoning you give behind them. In this series, can’t say I agree with all of them, but that’s as it should be, we’re not all clones. If you care to, I’d like to see you expand on your #14; ie.:

q14: "No new oil pipelines should be built in Canada."

‘strongly agree. and, they should keep it in the ground, too.’

Questions I have for you are:
- Are you interpreting “oil” literally or do you include other petroleum products such as natural gas in your objection?

- Since oil is used in the manufacture of plastics, fueling virtually all of modes of transportation right now, home heating, etc., I take it your objection is an aspirational goal, not absolute and immediate. Is that correct?

- Are you also opposed to existing pipelines?

- Unless we are in a completely petroleum free environment, which we aren’t at the moment, the product must be transported. In that case, do you prefer rail transport over pipelines?

- I fully understand the objection to putting pipeline depots in and through sensitive areas (Energy East insanely wanted to place a terminal near Saguenay–St. Lawrence Marine Park). Someone once proposed approving and creating a single corridor that all such things would have to pass through (eg. hydro transmission, rail, pipelines, etc.) to contain them in a very limited spot. Would you objectto that?

Probably more I could ask, but that will do.

Jessica Murray
the tar sands are a particular carbon nightmare due to the carbon cost of production. and, with the price of oil the way it is and likely will be for some time, we have an opportunity and an obligation to abandon the project altogether. that doesn't imply an immediate, overnight end to all oil production - just an immediate cessation of this particular dirty type of oil production. we could very well have more than ten years to play with before the price of oil comes down to the point that this source is even economically viable again.

plastics can be made with sources other than oil. oil is really just a bunch of carbon and hydrogen in a bubbling, soupy mess; anything that you can create with oil, you can create with renewable plant matter, like hemp.

the solutions to moving away from a carbon economy are widely available and widely understood, so i don't feel the need to go over them here.

(sorry. that's badly worded. the decision to produce will come down to profitability, which requires the price of oil to go up.)