[OnTheIce]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And the Fraiser Institute does this?

You don't have a clue what the Fraser Institute does, let alone know how to spell it.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And as I pointed out, and Andy's link shows, it's not me that noticed the trend.

And for some reason, you seem to think people shouldn't have a bias? It's not the first time this week you suggest that it's a bad thing.

What about the other 1/2 of the charities that were looked into? Should all 10 have them been right-leaning or do we give the left-leaning ones a pass on breaking the law?

Bias is fine, but let's not pretend otherwise. Just like you did in the cop-thread. Don't pretend to be impartial and fair when it's clear you're anything but.

momsbasement momsbasement:

OTI castigating somebody for bias is either having some fun with irony, or just total lack of self awareness. More likely the latter.

Coming from the guy who spends his life on forums trolling, you figured you`d be a little better at reading posts that people write. I guess it`s just easier to look at the guy with the "C" and assume that everything he says is bias. Requires you to think less. Your speciality.

But then again, you`re just here to troll.

[andyt]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

I guess it`s just easier to look at the guy with the "C" and assume that everything he says is bias.

Sometimes I'm just here to laugh. Yeah, that's it, the "C" not your posts.

[DrCaleb]

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And the Fraiser Institute does this?

You don't have a clue what the Fraser Institute does, let alone know how to spell it.

Actually, I have no care either. But I do know pretty much everything they do is political, which by your definition means they are not a charity.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And as I pointed out, and Andy's link shows, it's not me that noticed the trend.

And for some reason, you seem to think people shouldn't have a bias? It's not the first time this week you suggest that it's a bad thing.

What about the other 1/2 of the charities that were looked into? Should all 10 have them been right-leaning or do we give the left-leaning ones a pass on breaking the law?

Their lean shouldn't determine if they get audited. There should be a 'random' spread of charities that did not and did not criticize the Harper government, instead of a healthy dose of charities that have done so, and few to none that haven't.

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

Bias is fine, but let's not pretend otherwise. Just like you did in the cop-thread. Don't pretend to be impartial and fair when it's clear you're anything but.

You mean by not seeing anything that wasn't in the video, and not making assumptions based on things not in the video - I'm biased? You might want to consult a dictionary on that word if you are unfamiliar with it's meaning.

[Zipperfish]

Well I'll pound my drum again:

Firstly, all "think tanks" should have their charitable (or "not-for-profit" status revoked). Charity is for housing the homeless and feeding the hungry. Outfits like the Fraser INsitiute, that would find it efficient to feed the homeless to the hungry shouldn't be charities. And that goes for thinly veiled left-wing organziations too. If you aren't helping the needy, no status.

Secdonly, can we stop calling these places "think tanks." they are advocacy organziations, pute and simple and that is what they should be called. The Suzuki Foundation is an environemtnal advocacy group and the Candioan Taxpayers Federation is a small-government advocacy group. These organizations are more interested in promoting their viewpoitns than they are in "thinking" or research.

Harper has it half right. Unfortunately, he's decided to use the machinery of the state to go after his political enemies rather just revoke the status for all these advocacy organizations.

[Zipperfish]

andyt andyt:

OnTheIce OnTheIce:

I guess it`s just easier to look at the guy with the "C" and assume that everything he says is bias.

Sometimes I'm just here to laugh. Yeah, that's it, the "C" not your posts.

On the Ice pretty much just regurgitates whatever the Cobnservatvie talking points are on any issue. But he does it in such a clever way that he even tricks himself into thinking he is speaking independently.

[Thanos]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

....Cobnservatvie......

Best. Typo. Ever.

Time to break this bad boy out again.

$1:

i think halo is a pretty cool guy. eh kills aleins and doesn't afraid of anything.

- Zipeprficsh

[Zipperfish]

Thanos Thanos:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

....Cobnservatvie......

Best. Typo. Ever.

Time to break this bad boy out again.

$1:

i think halo is a pretty cool guy. eh kills aleins and doesn't afraid of anything.

- Zipeprficsh

[andyt]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Well I'll pound my drum again:

Firstly, all "think tanks" should have their charitable (or "not-for-profit" status revoked). Charity is for housing the homeless and feeding the hungry. Outfits like the Fraser INsitiute, that would find it efficient to feed the homeless to the hungry shouldn't be charities. And that goes for thinly veiled left-wing organziations too. If you aren't helping the needy, no status.

Secdonly, can we stop calling these places "think tanks." they are advocacy organziations, pute and simple and that is what they should be called. The Suzuki Foundation is an environemtnal advocacy group and the Candioan Taxpayers Federation is a small-government advocacy group. These organizations are more interested in promoting their viewpoitns than they are in "thinking" or research.

Harper has it half right. Unfortunately, he's decided to use the machinery of the state to go after his political enemies rather just revoke the status for all these advocacy organizations.

Charity is not the same as not for profit. Dying with Dignity will now be a non-profit and so not be able to issue tax receipts for donations. They are still exempt from paying income tax.

Charity should not be for housing the homeless and feeding the hungry either. That's the governments job, instead of relying on the vagaries of donations, and organizations spending a huge part of their income in raising that income in the first place. Charities just let the govt off the hook from doing its job. They should have no place in a modern state with a decent safety net.

[andyt]

Thanos Thanos:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

....Cobnservatvie......

Best. Typo. Ever.

As I said, Zip keeps writing about aliens with a cleft palate.

[Zipperfish]

andyt andyt:

Charity is not the same as not for profit. Dying with Dignity will now be a non-profit and so not be able to issue tax receipts for donations. They are still exempt from paying income tax.

Same shit, different pile.

$1:

Charity should not be for housing the homeless and feeding the hungry either. That's the governments job, instead of relying on the vagaries of donations, and organizations spending a huge part of their income in raising that income in the first place. Charities just let the govt off the hook from doing its job. They should have no place in a modern state with a decent safety net.

The gummint can't do that job. There will be poor always.

[andyt]

Then neither can charities, as we can see. Of course there will be poor compared to rich. There govt can ensure there are no people so poor they go hungry or have nowhere to live.

And, the govt should be funding medical costs, not relying on charity. That's just charity for everybody, not the poor.


And it's not same shit, different pile. Non-profits can't issue tax receipts. That's a big deal.

[Jabberwalker]

Regina Regina:

stratos stratos:

What is CRA?

Canada Revenue Agency .......it's like your IRS.

... except that the CRA don't (yet) have a surveillance satellite for counting the number and brand of automobiles in your driveway, whether you have a new swimming pool, etc ...

[Zipperfish]

andyt andyt:

Then neither can charities, as we can see. Of course there will be poor compared to rich. There govt can ensure there are no people so poor they go hungry or have nowhere to live.

And, the govt should be funding medical costs, not relying on charity. That's just charity for everybody, not the poor.


And it's not same shit, different pile. Non-profits can't issue tax receipts. That's a big deal.

O I C--not for profits don't pay taxes (like charities), but can't issue tax receipts. That is different.

I agree the gummint should not be relying on charity. It is certainly gotten that way with education. Can't remeber the last time the Navy raised money through a bake sale.

I still think there will always be a role for charities though.

[OnTheIce]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Actually, I have no care either. But I do know pretty much everything they do is political, which by your definition means they are not a charity.

Then you don't know much.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

You mean by not seeing anything that wasn't in the video, and not making assumptions based on things not in the video - I'm biased? You might want to consult a dictionary on that word if you are unfamiliar with it's meaning.

Are you kidding? You made plenty of assumptions based on what you saw in the video. You didn't have the full story but you had already made up your mind.

Just as you have done here, you make a lot of assumptions about a lot of things you know nothing about.

[andyt]

$1:

Canada's registered charities are not permitted to exercise moral pressure or promote "an attitude of mind" that might influence legislation, the federal taxman has ruled in stripping Dying with Dignity Canada of its charitable tax status.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/after-cra- ... z3PTpO6tbX


How the fuck is this not exactly what the Fraser Institute does?