Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!grand!rwwetmore From: rwwetmore@grand.waterloo.edu (Ross Wetmore) Newsgroups: can.general Subject: Re: TAX REVOLT NOW!! Message-ID: <28363@watmath.waterloo.edu> Date: 15 Aug 89 05:08:08 GMT References: <6758@themepark.UUCP> <6761@ulysses.UUCP> <6763@cognos.UUCP> <28307@watmath.waterloo.edu> <1989Aug13.000459.27775@utzoo.uucp> Sender: daemon@watmath.waterloo.edu Reply-To: rwwetmore@grand.waterloo.edu (Ross Wetmore) Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 44 In article <1989Aug13.000459.27775@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <28307@watmath.waterloo.edu> rwwetmore@grand.waterloo.edu (Ross Wetmore) writes: >>... Under a regime in which the people have >>no say in their government, it might be justifiable to blame government >>greed for excessive taxation. But in Canada, government policy is a reflection >>of the will of the people, at least as portrayed by the pollsters, pressure >>groups and media which are trying to mould it into their own shape. >That's a big "at least". The fact is, the government does not hesitate to >ignore the will of the people on issues like capital punishment, where >it considers the will of the people misguided. No one assumes the reflection is perfect or doesn't suffer time warp around election node points, and I see you yourself picked 1) a controversial example and 2) admitted other reasons than immediate populist pressure might also be relevant. But, 'political suicide' is a common expression in Canada, right? And the murder weapon is the ballot box, not so? >The people really have very little control over the doings of the government, On a day to day basis (thank goodness) ... but then I suspect that given the current bureaucracy, no one has. However, over the long haul, I suspect you might want to reconsider this. On any single issue, unless it is really fundamental and universally rejected by the populace, the government can and probably should have its own way, otherwise nothing unpopular would ever get done. But a government, that consistently ignores the majority wishes is soon an opposition, or worse. Would you really change this? >especially since the two major >parties -- one of which invariably gets in -- are Tweedledee and Tweedledum >and seldom differ in important ways. >Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology Ahhh ... a fellow cynic. However, it is important to have two and to alternate them periodically, just to maintain a certain degree of respect for the effectiveness of the 'suicide' weapon :-). But then again, too bad fiscal responsibility, or responsibility in general were not a little more respectable in our popular morality ... it would be nice to see politicians counting coup from a consistent, responsible position from day-to-day, and add a little variety to the "who's getting more than who plot". Maybe this would make the party images a little less amorphous and help to distinguish them. Ross W. Wetmore | rwwetmore@water.NetNorth University of Waterloo | rwwetmore@math.Uwaterloo.ca Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1 | {uunet, ubc-vision, utcsri} (519) 885-1211 ext 4719 | !watmath!rwwetmore