Originally Posted by mike_302

ROFL, oh you need a reality check.

Do you know how many years a plane is in commission?

Conservatives are the reason we have a world class economy? Do you understand how long the Conservatives have been in power? There isn't even a debate, and Conservative voters wouldn't even dispute that the Liberals were the ones that balanced the Canadian budgets to give us a surplus.

Money wasting? On education? On health care? On caring for an aging population? Sounds like what a government should be doing. And don't be so naive: The Conservatives are promising the same things (health care, eduation, etc.) But they're the ones saying they're going to spend on this AND cut taxes.

So. So. Naive. Your post wasn't even a challenge to make a rebuttle to. There are a lot of Conservative voters that would agree with everything I just said too...

Do you mean the "conservatives" that took that cbc quiz? please..., the liberals didn't have a recession to deal with. If it wasn't for the minority parties whining about lack of spending on wasteful government programs, then there would be no deficit. The conservatives didn't want to spend even half of what they did, and look! the conservatives were still able to make Canada the model country it is.
If you want here are the years of the planes:
1982,1988, 2000, 1987,1980,1990,1962, 1992, 1993, 2007, 2008, 1982, 1985, 1970, 1960, 1997, 1967, 1980, 1991.

I, personally would not feel safe flying in an aircraft built in 1962. Speaking of education, is it not the teachers who are on the payroll of governments that are pooling their money so that one candidate wins over the other? This is where you want your money to go? There needs to be reform in these areas. Throwing money isn't going to solve the problem, it only makes it worse. As for seniors, it's called investment. We have free health care, and beyond that, what else do they want? Naive? No, I don't sink to that level and name call one on the opposite spectrum no matter what fairy tale they believe. It's just funny that I have information to back up my opinions.

... Silly MI.. I can't see the newest post when a new page is made

Edit: SO I post this message for it to show up! {ignore this}

Your plane "information" is just years... Look into it a bit more I promise you you've flown on some planes that existed before you were born if you've been on more than a couple of flights. So that information you have is useless...

As for "Liberals never had a recession to deal with", again: You're naive to believe that. Do you know how often the Liberals have been in power in Canada? They've seen more recessions than you know of, and they've seen their share of depressions.

You're so far off the beaten track when you say the Conservatives have made Canada what it is today, and I don't need to provide more "information". Go back through the thread. There's plent of information provided (with links too!)

"We have free health care, what else do they want" ???????? I'm sorry, but I don't have the time to explain that health care is actually a major debate in Canada, and there are issues plaguing the system because of funding and programs. You'll have to look into that on your own time.

Originally Posted by mike_302

The Liberals aren't silly about the economy. They're pretty damned smart, especially if they're up there campaigning next to the Conservatives in popularity... 15% is mighty high already. Without a majority, they'll have a hard enough time moving it to 15%, and when you say "given enough time" you'd be nuts to think that they could do it in the given economic state, +/- 5 years. So I'm going to NOT look at that during this round of elections.

As for corporate taxes: Again, if it;s going to cost the Canadian economy jobs, that would be a) shot down without a majority b) far too obviously stupid to do given the political AND economic situation...

Hmm, maybe that's why the Conservatives have been doing all these secret money dealings: The stupid stuff that a government spends on is best kept quiet when your economy is teetering back and forth on the egde of a recession.

Recession is not something you get out of in 5 months. Geez be realistic, obviously the government has to stay committed to whatever was planed before we had the recession. If Canada wants to be part of the G8 or whatever, then we have to deliver and act like world class leaders when its needed,not hide in a hole somewhere.

Very few of these rebuttles are hitting back at the point I'm making very clear: Look at the article I linked to early today... The point I made immediately after that was that the government hid the costs, and then spent illegally! If you don't believe me, wait until Parliament is back in, vote Conservative if you want, and wait until it EXPLODES that the Conservatives are facing charges for their handling of the situation.

If you need "information" here it is: They put in a request for funding and labelled it "funding to decrease border wait times". That was for $83 million. FYI: Huntsville is hundreds of kilometers from a border. And yet the majority of that funding went to the G8. But OH! Wait, the Conservatives defended their actions: We spent $8 million less than we said we would......

Completely off-topic, but more information about plane lifespan: Trans-continental planes, as you might think, have many hours on them, but planes aren't decommissioned because they've been around for a while. They're decommisioned when cracks and stresses in the structure become too costly to repair. Plane bodies experience the most stress from the pressurization and depressurization cycles while going up and down. Therefore, you can guess why the 747 that flies from North America to Europe and back, sevarl times a week, is not decommisioned for 30-40 years. The plane that goes to Newfoundland, and stops twice in between, pressurizing and depressurizing 12 times daily, is decommissioned after 10-20 years though.

This is all pretty consistent with my basic knowledge of materials and stress failures...

Originally Posted by mike_302

Completely off-topic, but more information about plane lifespan: Trans-continental planes, as you might think, have many hours on them, but planes aren't decommissioned because they've been around for a while. They're decommisioned when cracks and stresses in the structure become too costly to repair. Plane bodies experience the most stress from the pressurization and depressurization cycles while going up and down. Therefore, you can guess why the 747 that flies from North America to Europe and back, sevarl times a week, is not decommisioned for 30-40 years. The plane that goes to Newfoundland, and stops twice in between, pressurizing and depressurizing 12 times daily, is decommissioned after 10-20 years though.

This is all pretty consistent with my basic knowledge of materials and stress failures...

good, but it's almost 50 years if the plane was built in 1962 like some military planes. good try, though.

Originally Posted by mike_302

Your plane "information" is just years... Look into it a bit more I promise you you've flown on some planes that existed before you were born if you've been on more than a couple of flights. So that information you have is useless...

As for "Liberals never had a recession to deal with", again: You're naive to believe that. Do you know how often the Liberals have been in power in Canada? They've seen more recessions than you know of, and they've seen their share of depressions.

You're so far off the beaten track when you say the Conservatives have made Canada what it is today, and I don't need to provide more "information". Go back through the thread. There's plent of information provided (with links too!)

"We have free health care, what else do they want" ???????? I'm sorry, but I don't have the time to explain that health care is actually a major debate in Canada, and there are issues plaguing the system because of funding and programs. You'll have to look into that on your own time.

I find it funny you didn't mention the waste in the system, or the fact that Canada was in a miserable state in the 70's that was caused by the liberals. Also, what about our nation sending our troops to Afghanistan in forest camo and without ammunition to protect themselves under the martin government? It's not just the federal liberals. Look at e-health, "smart meters", HST, etc. this is long term liberals that you keep on mentioning. Ontario is now a have-not province because of long term liberals.

Originally Posted by Misspolitics

good, but it's almost 50 years if the plane was built in 1962 like some military planes. good try, though.

The date a plane is built is COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Do you have any idea how many hours of maintenance are spent working on a plane per every hour of flight? ESPECIALLY military planes.

In fact, I regularly fly planes that are 50 years or older. And I feel just as safe as I do while flying newer planes.

Just because a plane was built 50 years ago do not mean that all the parts are 50 years old - the planes may have been overhauled more recently, they just aren't "rebranded" with that year.

Source: I'm a pilot.

Originally Posted by Misspolitics

I find it funny you didn't mention the waste in the system, or the fact that Canada was in a miserable state in the 70's that was caused by the liberals. Also, what about our nation sending our troops to Afghanistan in forest camo and without ammunition to protect themselves under the martin government? It's not just the federal liberals. Look at e-health, "smart meters", HST, etc. this is long term liberals that you keep on mentioning. Ontario is now a have-not province because of long term liberals.

I`m finished responding to your posts. You`re not capturing the points of previous messages which completely make your rebuttals seem pointless. In particular, with respect to this post, I have said time and time again that the Liberal have restructured. It`s not 1970, nor is it 1980, 1990, or 2000... You`re arguing that the Liberals had a bit of a poor run in the `70s, or nearly a decade ago because you quickly read a single article about Harper`s argument against Trudeau (who`s dead, btw, Mr. Harper).

I`m not pointing out the obvious anymore. You figure it out.

Originally Posted by Elliott779

The date a plane is built is COMPLETELY irrelevant.

Do you have any idea how many hours of maintenance are spent working on a plane per every hour of flight? ESPECIALLY military planes.

In fact, I regularly fly planes that are 50 years or older. And I feel just as safe as I do while flying newer planes.

Just because a plane was built 50 years ago do not mean that all the parts are 50 years old - the planes may have been overhauled more recently, they just aren't "rebranded" with that year.

Source: I'm a pilot.

Are you fighting in Afghanistan? I can understand if you work for the Canadian warplane heritage museum, but in combat?! you need better machinery than that. top technology is needed in war situations when your life is at risk and we owe this to our soldiers.

Originally Posted by mike_302

I`m finished responding to your posts. You`re not capturing the points of previous messages which completely make your rebuttals seem pointless. In particular, with respect to this post, I have said time and time again that the Liberal have restructured. It`s not 1970, nor is it 1980, 1990, or 2000... You`re arguing that the Liberals had a bit of a poor run in the `70s, or nearly a decade ago because you quickly read a single article about Harper`s argument against Trudeau (who`s dead, btw, Mr. Harper).

I`m not pointing out the obvious anymore. You figure it out.

Nice way to not confront the obvious in my posts. But nonetheless, good luck on your exams

Originally Posted by Misspolitics

Are you fighting in Afghanistan? I can understand if you work for the Canadian warplane heritage museum, but in combat?! you need better machinery than that. top technology is needed in war situations when your life is at risk and we owe this to our soldiers.

Technological superiority is a completely different issue than the mechanical state of a plane.

Yes, I do agree that in combat situations, it is very important to have the technological upper hand.

That being said, that does not mean that our 50 year old war-planes are falling out of the sky, contrary to your original post:

Originally Posted by Misspolitics

I, personally would not feel safe flying in an aircraft built in 1962

They are just as functional and safe as the new aircraft, albeit less advanced.

Originally Posted by Misspolitics

Are you fighting in Afghanistan? I can understand if you work for the Canadian warplane heritage museum, but in combat?! you need better machinery than that. top technology is needed in war situations when your life is at risk and we owe this to our soldiers.

If a road is 80 years old, should you immediately dig it up to build a new one? Shouldn't you? Thousands may drive on it in a given year....

Oh wait, regularly serviced aircraft (many spent more time in maintenance that in flight due to the nature of military aircraft) to make sure that they are as safe as possible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._Afghanis tan

Would like some links on how many Canadian military aircraft malfunctioned please. And technological superiority in Afghanistan.....reall y?