Change wouldn’t be for the better

Canada's financial position is much more secure than many governments who have fallen for the socialist tag.

To the Editor,

Change is the current word, but definitely not for the better.

Over the years, Canada has maintained respect throughout the world. Our financial position is much more secure than many governments who have fallen for the socialist tag. Prime Minister Stephen Harper may not be popular, but his stewardship has kept Canada at an even  keel.

Our two ‘pretenders to the throne’ have always been involved in politics and living on the taxpayer dime. Governments generate no money, but do collect from those who actually contribute to society, and distribute the tax as they see fit in a socialist world. Good for everybody, but only contributed by a few – until they tire of being taken, and move.

The socialist twins Justin Trudeau and Tom Mulcair vocalize massive money giveaways with no thought of the source of cash except huge tax increases.

D.F. ConnorsNanaimo


To the Editor,

One thing that seems to be lacking in discussion at the present time is the long-term support for seniors. There will be about nine million of us by 2030. The Liberals, NDP and Greens seem to be on track for lots of spending which will mean interest payments on government loans. If the lending rates go up over the next few years, Canadians will find most of their tax payments go to service debt costs, leaving little for old age security payments and supplements, if all the promised spending is put in place. The Conservatives seem to be more on track for long-term support for all Canadians of all ages.

Seniors need to exercise their right for long-term benefits and say no to excessive spending.

Ernie McClareNanaimo


To the Editor,

Re: PM Harper rules as if he’s a dictator, Letters, Oct. 6.

What an absolutely absurd headline to choose for the letters page.

There are two things no native-born Canadian has ever experienced – one is life under a dictator and two is life under socialism (which is a dictatorship by another name).

I spent five years fighting and being on the receiving end of a dictatorship in my native Britain and then was forced to spend another five years of rationing, shortages and iron-fisted controls, all for no other reason than the socialist government decreed it as part of an attempt to turn my country into a socialist dictatorship. Twice more I was to suffer under socialism until in 1974, with the country completely under the control of unelected trade unions and economically on its knees, I decided enough was enough and brought my family to a really free democracy. I certainly don’t want to see that kind of socialist dictatorship getting a foothold here.

If we were ever so foolish, voters would quickly find out what a dictatorship really means and would just as quickly be yearning for the ‘benign’ rule of a Stephen Harper government.

Charles ReidNanaimo


To the Editor,

‘Anybody but Conservative’ voters want Stephen Harper replaced by Justin Trudeau or Tom Mulcair, who, ironically, are actually splitting the ABC vote. If either one actually gets a majority, many would welcome the dramatic 180-degree turnaround. Unfortunately, 180 degrees is only a semi-revolution.

Mulcair, who promises change, has instead been muzzling candidates. A more democratic agenda might also be more revolutionary – like insisting on Elizabeth May’s inclusion in debates.

Leaders need to communicate, not excommunicate, muzzle and whip representatives who may occasionally dissent from the official party line, but who offer positive options and solutions.

Whether the cats running Canada are Liberal, Bloc Québécois, Conservative, NDP or Green, Canadian mice deserve to at least hear the options before we make that choice.

Norman AbbeyNanaimo