Conference kaosws::canada

    97K is not excessive for a head of state.
    
    What we need to do is dump the monarchy, make the G-G's office a
    little more substantial, and find a way of getting truly eminent people
    in the job (not, as at present, amiable 2nd-tier ex-politicians.)
    
    -Stephen

    CTHU26::S_BURRIDGE
    
    >>make the G-G's office a little more substantial
    
     I assume the position would not be an appointment if it were more
    "substantial". I don't want a "president" so I hope that is not what
    you mean.
    
    							Derek.

    Well, Jean Chretien did ask Jean Beliveau, but was turned down.

    Does anybody remember when BP's salary was increased to 900K? How did you
    feel about that? 97K for a head of state? What's the big deal? This is
    not where the government waste is. When will revenue Canada collect the 6
    Billion dollars in back taxes? Hello? Is anybody thinking rationally?
    As much as we can't stand the politicians, we need them, and I believe
    they should be paid well. If we don't pay them well, then only the
    elite will be able to be our leaders, and I don't want to see that happen.

    Glenn

    I guess what I mean is remove the subservience to the monarch.  Make
    the G-G a true haed of state.  You need someone in that kind of
    constitutional role. 
    
    -Stephen

    Monarchy? Did I read somewhere monarchy? Why I am so naive? Me
    retarded,now I understand why almost half paycheque is going to revenue
    Canada,I have to support the local Canadian governament plus I have to
    support the monarchy. I am so naive,I always thought that monarchy is
    something from the past,from the medieval age,I am getting lost here,
    are we living in the 21 century? Well to punish myself for my ignorance
    I am going to cheer her majesty the queen next time she'll pay a visit
    to Canada at taxpayer expenses.....

                      <<< Note 874.5 by POLAR::BUCCIONE >>>
                               -< Monarchy???? >-

    >>Monarchy? Did I read somewhere monarchy? Why I am so naive? Me
    >>retarded,now I understand why almost half paycheque is going to revenue
    >>Canada,I have to support the local Canadian governament plus I have to
    >>support the monarchy. I am so naive,I always thought that monarchy is
    >>something from the past,from the medieval age,I am getting lost here,
    >>are we living in the 21 century? Well to punish myself for my ignorance
    >>I am going to cheer her majesty the queen next time she'll pay a visit
    >>to Canada at taxpayer expenses.....

    I don't know about *you*, but I'm in the 20th century. You must have a
    hell of time with the TV guide.
    
    When ANY head of state visits Canada, we pick up the tab.  Big deal.
    The Queen should pay her own way, but we pick up the tab for Clinton,
    Yeltsin, and the King of Borneo when they blow into town?  
    Does that make sense to you?      
    
    We have to pick up the tab for our head of state, whether it's a hockey
    player, politician, or Glenn, (whom I understand only missed by a
    trouser leg).    
    
    
    Marshall

    re .6
    
    Or you are missing my point or you like to support parasites.....

    I'm not sure, but I think I was just insulted.
    
    I think I'm going to cry....
    
    snif.
    
    Glenn

    re. .5, .7
    
    What exactly is your point?
    Other than you being retarded somewhere in the 21st century I was a
    little lost.  

    
    "supporting the parasite race?"
    
    Gee, I could have sworn that kind of comment was over the line for
    notes-files.  It is for me.  
    
    I don't have a big thing for the Queen or the monarchy.  I can take it
    or leave it.  Especially her younger relatives.  
    
    Being of the approximately the same racial origin as Liz I don't think 
    I want to hear your "point".  You've made it.  
    
    
           
    
    

    Well I have to admit that i wrote a very nasty note,I just don't want
    to pay extra tax for "extravagant" people,that's all.
    
    Chapter close for me and I apologies if I offended some queen's fan.

    Well, folks, I suspect it works both ways.  I'm sure Chretien doesn't
    get a bill for the motorcade/security/etc he receives when oversees!  
    
    For the record, if removing the G-G level of gov't will remove $200k
    p.a. of gov't expenses, I'm all for it.  

    200K? This is not the problem. You know, they'd only replace it with
    something more costly.

    If there's no incentive for political offices, it leaves the whole
    shooting match in the hands of the rich. I for the record do not want
    to see that happen.

    Glenn

    >>> If there's no incentive for political offices, it leaves the whole
    >>> shooting match in the hands of the rich.
    
    
    And just who do think is controlling it now?  It certainly isn't
    the over exploited masses.
    
    
    Just my 2� worth,
    
    
    Robin

    It's not always the rich, but if you take away the travel perks and the
    expense perks then you ensure that it will only be the rich. There
    would be absolutely no incentive for a middle class individual to
    consider a career in politics.

    Glenn

     
    Especially since the trend to muck-raking and almost impossible
    standards means the average candidate can find themselves and their
    families publicly humiliated very easily these days.  Nothing is 
    private any more and you have to get rid of your sense of humour.
    And find yourself automatically assumed to be a 'typical politican'.
    
    Why would anybody 'normal' want the job now?  Don't make it worse.
    
    
      

    Good point!
    
    So, do you think I have a chance?
    
    Glenn

	I can see the headlines now....

		RICHARDSON WHIRLY-TWIRLIES HIS WAY INTO THE HEARTS
		OF CANADIANS COAST TO COAST AMID RENEWED VOWS FOR
		A COMPLETED GRAND CANAL

    This troubles me.

<---- I'm sorry, but this is irrelevant isn't it?