Welcome to the BDSM Library.
  • Login:
beymenslotgir.com kalebet34.net escort bodrum bodrum escort
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 39 of 39
  1. #31
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    253
    Post Thanks / Like

    Spending limits or lack there off

    Quote Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
    The issue is not campaigning. It is fundrasing, which occurs year round. Some of which is paid for with votes.

    By the by the last Presidential election ran for nearly two years. And the winner has yet to stop campaigning!!!
    The U.S. laws have huge problems with how much one can spend during a campaign. This makes fundraising for years and years (Basically the whole time one is in office) the lifeblood of a campaign.

    In Canada, we have a lot of candidates that are highly successful who don't spend an excessive amount of time fund raising. In my current riding our current MP (Member of Parliament) is Olivia Chow of the NDP (New Democrats Party -> Basically Canada's most left wing serious party).

    She manages to get out to community rallies, events, show up in parliament when its in session, help individuals in our community deal with issues like government improperly processing their UI (Unemployment Insurance), or other such issues. Before that I lived in a different riding, a seat that was held by Ken Dryden (A Liberal -> Canada's main centrist party), who had a similar track record.

    Many of my friends have lived in ridings (I think you guys call these congressional districts) where the Conservative Party of Canada (our right wing party) has a seat and attest that the candidates have similar track records.

    In short, for the most part our politicians attend to their responsibilities both in parliament and in the communities which they represent. And a lot of this is that they don't have to run elitist expensive fundraisers as often as possible to ensure re-election.

  2. #32
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,218
    Post Thanks / Like
    How long is Parliament in session?

    Quote Originally Posted by SadisticNature View Post
    The U.S. laws have huge problems with how much one can spend during a campaign. This makes fundraising for years and years (Basically the whole time one is in office) the lifeblood of a campaign.

    In Canada, we have a lot of candidates that are highly successful who don't spend an excessive amount of time fund raising. In my current riding our current MP (Member of Parliament) is Olivia Chow of the NDP (New Democrats Party -> Basically Canada's most left wing serious party).

    She manages to get out to community rallies, events, show up in parliament when its in session, help individuals in our community deal with issues like government improperly processing their UI (Unemployment Insurance), or other such issues. Before that I lived in a different riding, a seat that was held by Ken Dryden (A Liberal -> Canada's main centrist party), who had a similar track record.

    Many of my friends have lived in ridings (I think you guys call these congressional districts) where the Conservative Party of Canada (our right wing party) has a seat and attest that the candidates have similar track records.

    In short, for the most part our politicians attend to their responsibilities both in parliament and in the communities which they represent. And a lot of this is that they don't have to run elitist expensive fundraisers as often as possible to ensure re-election.

  3. #33
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    253
    Post Thanks / Like

    Long enough

    Quote Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
    How long is Parliament in session?
    Our parliament is in session long enough to address the changes in law the level of government needs to make. Parliament is far from the only job our elected representatives have, and they need to balance those other responsibilities.

  4. #34
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,218
    Post Thanks / Like
    It was not a trick question.
    Trying to get a prospective of how the two differ or compare.
    Here Congress works about 180 days. Recent news has them working extra hard at three days a week.
    Somehow I do not feel I am getting value for the cost.

    Tried to find some help on the Parliament sessions. Interesting that your answer, while seeming a bit flip is actually kind of accurate. Not sure our Congress could get its collective head around that idea. They actually think they work really hard and earn their pay as it is!

    Quote Originally Posted by SadisticNature View Post
    Our parliament is in session long enough to address the changes in law the level of government needs to make. Parliament is far from the only job our elected representatives have, and they need to balance those other responsibilities.
    Last edited by DuncanONeil; 03-10-2010 at 10:28 AM. Reason: Research

  5. #35
    Keeping the Ahh in Kajira
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Last paga tavern on the left.
    Posts
    5,625
    Post Thanks / Like
    All the more reason to vote the lot of our bastards..oops, I mean incumbant congressmen out of office.
    When love beckons to you, follow him,Though his ways are hard and steep. And when his wings enfold you yield to him, Though the sword hidden among his pinions may wound thee
    KAHLIL GIBRAN, The Prophet

  6. #36
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    253
    Post Thanks / Like

    The idea is sound

    Quote Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
    It was not a trick question.
    Trying to get a prospective of how the two differ or compare.
    Here Congress works about 180 days. Recent news has them working extra hard at three days a week.
    Somehow I do not feel I am getting value for the cost.

    Tried to find some help on the Parliament sessions. Interesting that your answer, while seeming a bit flip is actually kind of accurate. Not sure our Congress could get its collective head around that idea. They actually think they work really hard and earn their pay as it is!
    Basically if they are going to have their own offices and staff for political reasons anyways, and they are supposed to work for their constituents, why not give them the responsibility and authority to deal with the issues their constituents may have. I think part of the reason politics is less radicalized in Canada, is that we can count on good representation on these responsibilities even from a person on the opposite side of the issue as us.

  7. #37
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,218
    Post Thanks / Like
    "Basically if they are going to have their own offices and staff for political reasons anyways, and they are supposed to work for their constituents, why not give them the responsibility and authority to deal with the issues their constituents may have."
    Huh??
    I don't see how that relates to what I said!


    Quote Originally Posted by SadisticNature View Post
    Basically if they are going to have their own offices and staff for political reasons anyways, and they are supposed to work for their constituents, why not give them the responsibility and authority to deal with the issues their constituents may have. I think part of the reason politics is less radicalized in Canada, is that we can count on good representation on these responsibilities even from a person on the opposite side of the issue as us.

  8. #38
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    253
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
    "Basically if they are going to have their own offices and staff for political reasons anyways, and they are supposed to work for their constituents, why not give them the responsibility and authority to deal with the issues their constituents may have."
    Huh??
    I don't see how that relates to what I said!
    I was providing details of why the Canadian setup makes sense. I think it relates to the idea of getting a congressperson's head around it. If the taxpayers are going to pay for your salary, office costs, secretary, etc., then you are responsible for these services to your constituents.

  9. #39
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,218
    Post Thanks / Like
    OK!
    Just to add to that line of thought, the accepted number per Congressman is somewhere north of $1,000,000 each including office and staff!


    Quote Originally Posted by SadisticNature View Post
    I was providing details of why the Canadian setup makes sense. I think it relates to the idea of getting a congressperson's head around it. If the taxpayers are going to pay for your salary, office costs, secretary, etc., then you are responsible for these services to your constituents.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Back to top