Pierre the Great Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 BINGO! It's one thing to represent interests, it's another thing to get meet those interests. Since the BQ can never form the Governement, they can only act as spokepersons for certain Quebecois. It's alright in some ways; but it's nothing compared to actual power. well technically the BQ could form a government. But that would be the doomsday scenario for Canada. e. A big part of our province wish to separate from the rest of Canada. Yeah we lost the 2 referendums but 49% of the province voted FOR the independence. Don't forget that. And the BQ is there for them. The last referendum question was flawed. The 49% was because of the trick question. If the PQ came up with a question like: Do you want to be a completely independent country, with no ties to Canada you'd get a 75% No vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 In the event of a Oui vote win. Quebec would become the new Northern Ireland. Montreal the new Belfast. That's an almost certainty. A Oui vote especially if its 50-49 the other way basically means the end of Quebec as you know it. And if somehow the 49% decides to go with you, a new party will be formed by the 49% to bring Quebec back into Canada. Then there's the economic problems. You are a have not province in Canada. You can't survive on your own at the moment. You leave you take your billions in debt with you. You'd have to print your own money, and start a new. At the same time businesses will flee Montreal. Your new money will be half of what the loonie is. And you'd be massively in debt. If you had a strong economy then you could make the case but to win a referendum now most certainly means mass chaos in Quebec. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 In the event of a Oui vote win. Quebec would become the new Northern Ireland. Montreal the new Belfast. That's an almost certainty. A Oui vote especially if its 50-49 the other way basically means the end of Quebec as you know it. And if somehow the 49% decides to go with you, a new party will be formed by the 49% to bring Quebec back into Canada. Then there's the economic problems. You are a have not province in Canada. You can't survive on your own at the moment. You leave you take your billions in debt with you. You'd have to print your own money, and start a new. At the same time businesses will flee Montreal. Your new money will be half of what the loonie is. And you'd be massively in debt. If you had a strong economy then you could make the case but to win a referendum now most certainly means mass chaos in Quebec. Seperatist reply: *stick fingers in ears* lalaalala mmmm I cant hear you lalalalala utopia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 a separatist friend of mine said that the separation of québec from canada will be without any bad feelings... i looked at him and said... hmmmm......... i wonder how many divorces actually leave both parties being 'still friends' à la hollywood or y&r... in truth, very few... VERY few... GO :hlogo: GO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Changing landscape Chantal Hebert Excerpt: Meanwhile in Quebec, the reaction to the sudden prospect of a Liberal tax cut was confusion rather than celebration. If he comes in a close second behind Boisclair and the PQ on Monday night, Charest could hang on to power and try to strike a deal with Dumont, to pre-empt a PQ minority government. There is no doubt that sovereignist voters would react with fury, but such an arrangement would at least spare the PQ the pain of spending another mandate failing to bring about a winning referendum. If it manages to avoid a historical defeat and to crawl across the finish line in first place, it will largely be because of a combination of the efforts of former premier Jacques Parizeau and a favourable split in the votes resulting from the stronger ADQ presence rather than as the result of a surge in sovereignist fervour. More so than any other sovereignist figure, Parizeau has carried Boisclair on his shoulders over the past month, tirelessly striving to bridge the gap between the PQ's disengaged traditional nationalist base and its rookie, urban leadership. But even Parizeau cannot turn water into wine. If the Quebec campaign had been a referendum on a referendum, the verdict would already be in. There is no impetus for a replay of the 1995 cliff-hanger vote on Quebec's political future. On the contrary, the belief that the chances for another referendum are remote has facilitated the exodus of federalist voters unhappy with Charest's first mandate to the ADQ. Ironically, if the PQ ends up with the largest number of seats Monday night, it would do so with one of its lowest scores ever and only because so many Quebecers are convinced that in its old age, the party has become a toothless tiger. Even the arts community, the very soul of the sovereignty movement, is branching out of the battle. In this campaign, many of its members lined up behind Quebec Solidaire, the province's fledging left-wing party. If the PQ is returned to opposition on Monday, the search for a replacement will start on the morning after the election. But the party lacks a unifying figure. It does not have a leader of the stature of Lucien Bouchard, René Lévesque or Parizeau waiting in the wings. The name most often mentioned to replace Boisclair is that of Gilles Duceppe. But in his role as Bloc leader – a position that involves never having to force an unpopular decision on a reluctant public – he, too, has been losing his Quebec audience, to the Conservatives but also to Stéphane Dion's Liberals and to the Green party. One way or another, it looks like there will be no real closure for anyone on Monday. The next act in this saga will take place on the stage of the next federal election. http://www.thestar.com/article/195588 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Ok Joe. You can have your country. Be warned that metro-Montreal then becomes a city-state that remains part of Canada. My house JUMPED in value as soon as the PQ was ousted by Jean Charest and the liberals. Of course, you'll tell us that was a coincidence. The whole QC independance thing is such a tired act. My god what an individualist thought. What an individualist thread anyway. You guys just think to your pokets full of money and taxes decrease with the Parti Libéral. I'm totally for the redistribution of the wealth in Québec. I think the system in here who allows the much poor citizens (you know those who live elsewhere than southshore or Westmount...) to get free medication, almost free education, social assistance, etc. is beautiful and should be adopted worldwide. Well it might never be like that, but the world and the societies would be better under a PQ or even QS system than the PLQ that's for sure... I will never care if i buy my house for 110 000$ and it jumped to 135 000$ 3 years after, it's just not my style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 (edited) Ok Joe. You can have your country. Be warned that metro-Montreal then becomes a city-state that remains part of Canada. My house JUMPED in value as soon as the PQ was ousted by Jean Charest and the liberals. Of course, you'll tell us that was a coincidence. The whole QC independance thing is such a tired act. that's as foolish a statement as i ever read one... it's got about as much validity as saying that all lands north of and east of the montreal/rouyn road will separate from québec because they're traditional indian lands... WON'T HAPPEN! GO :hlogo: GO! Edited March 25, 2007 by shortcat1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 My god what an individualist thought. What an individualist thread anyway. You guys just think to your pokets full of money and taxes decrease with the Parti Libéral. I'm totally for the redistribution of the wealth in Québec. I think the system in here who allows the much poor citizens (you know those who live elsewhere than southshore or Westmount...) to get free medication, almost free education, social assistance, etc. is beautiful and should be adopted worldwide. Well it might never be like that, but the world and the societies would be better under a PQ or even QS system than the PLQ that's for sure... I will never care if i buy my house for 110 000$ and it jumped to 135 000$ 3 years after, it's just not my style. OK dude but that's because you're a communist. Normal people work for themselves, that's why communism failed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 that's as foolish a statement as i ever read one... it's got about as much validity as saying that all lands north of and east of the montreal/rouyn road will separate from québec because they're traditional indian lands... WON'T HAPPEN! GO :hlogo: GO! Foolish eh... so is your analogy. First of all, it's not an idea I just came up with, it's been debated at length by federalists since the 1995 fiasco. The city of Montreal has the most to lose in seperation. Books have been written on how much it has lost already. Estimates of people leaving the province run as high as 400,000 since the 70's. Toronto surpassed Montreal as Canada's most important city, even Calgary, a city 1/3 of the population, has more head-offices. I'll say one thing though Shortcat, your reaction only illustrates that people outside the province don't get it, and luckily have no say in it's future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Foolish eh... so is your analogy. First of all, it's not an idea I just came up with, it's been debated at length by federalists since the 1995 fiasco. The city of Montreal has the most to lose in seperation. Books have been written on how much it has lost already. Estimates of people leaving the province run as high as 400,000 since the 70's. Toronto surpassed Montreal as Canada's most important city, even Calgary, a city 1/3 of the population, has more head-offices. I'll say one thing though Shortcat, your reaction only illustrates that people outside the province don't get it, and luckily have no say in it's future. the 'berlinization' of montréal wouldn't happen except by some sort of military intervention... west berlin's 'island' status was as a result of a military action and military support for over 5 decades... no, i won't have any say on québec's and montréal's future but, all those books that you say were written don't mean that it'll take place... i'm speaking from a historical perspective... there's no way the new 'nation' of québec will allow montréal separate from it also without a huge fight... GO :hlogo: GO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 the 'berlinization' of montréal wouldn't happen except by some sort of military intervention... west berlin's 'island' status was as a result of a military action and military support for over 5 decades... no, i won't have any say on québec's and montréal's future but, all those books that you say were written don't mean that it'll take place... i'm speaking from a historical perspective... there's no way the new 'nation' of québec will allow montréal separate from it also without a huge fight... GO :hlogo: GO! Oh ok. So what are they supposed to fight with? And why do you have to bring up a Berlin reference, with all it's negative history? I'm not talking military, barracades and borders. I'm talking Singapore, Macau or Hong Kong, to name a few. If Quebec can peacefully seperate from Canada than Montreal can peacefully stay where it wants. If seperation occurs, and the country is cut in two, than anything can happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Oh ok. So what are they supposed to fight with? And why do you have to bring up a Berlin reference, with all it's negative history? I'm not talking military, barracades and borders. I'm talking Singapore, Macau or Hong Kong, to name a few. If Quebec can peacefully seperate from Canada than Montreal can peacefully stay where it wants. If seperation occurs, and the country is cut in two, than anything can happen. well, to meet you in the middle a bit, i hope that if something like that takes place that it does peacefully... nevertheless, i don't see separation by québec being a totally peaceful process... also, your examples of hong kong and singapore are not applicable either because those two places were taken by colonizing countries through negotiations, i suppose, but there was still a military fist in the background... the british empire was the USA of it's time - an international powerhouse that ruled everywhere the sun shone (and it shone everywhere) as to macau, i don't know of its history... likely it's the same... GO :hlogo: GO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 My god what an individualist thought. What an individualist thread anyway. You guys just think to your pokets full of money and taxes decrease with the Parti Libéral. I'm totally for the redistribution of the wealth in Québec. I think the system in here who allows the much poor citizens (you know those who live elsewhere than southshore or Westmount...) to get free medication, almost free education, social assistance, etc. is beautiful and should be adopted worldwide. Well it might never be like that, but the world and the societies would be better under a PQ or even QS system than the PLQ that's for sure... I will never care if i buy my house for 110 000$ and it jumped to 135 000$ 3 years after, it's just not my style. I respect your opinion, but, please tell me you're not living in your parents basement, without a care in the world?? Enough damage has been done to our beautiful province and city since the 70's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 I respect your opinion, but, please tell me you're not living in your parents basement, without a care in the world?? Enough damage has been done to our beautiful province and city since the 70's. Nope, living with my girlfriend in a 4 1/2 in Hochelaga-Maisonneuve, working part-time to pay my University classes, my transport, my food and my RDS for watching hockey games... A damned chance Habs don't play on monday... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 All those debates about what would happen after separation are a bit silly because theyre will be no separation unless english canada gets tired of our constant whining and kick our butt out of the country. Frankly sometimes I wouldnt blame them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 OK dude but that's because you're a communist. Normal people work for themselves, that's why communism failed. Man, i'm not saying every citizen must have the same food ratio, drive the same car, and earn the same salary... You're 100 000 km away in the blizard. I just say that those who makes more money (INCLUDING big banks who save billions in tax evasions every years) have to participate in the redistribution. Even lawyers eat in fast-foods... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sakiqc Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 All those debates about what would happen after separation are a bit silly because theyre will be no separation unless english canada gets tired of our constant whining and kick our butt out of the country. Frankly sometimes I wouldnt blame them. Quebec will separate when the people of the province of Quebec decides so. It is the right to self-determination, which is a recognized international law. It has nothing to do with the ROC loving or hating Quebec (neither Quebec hating or loving them). About the election, it's interesting to see how the ADQ has risen in the charts in the last decade. Makes for a very interesting election. Seems like it could go any way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 I find it quite funny when they do a poll of BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and they say they'd like to form a country lol. Alberta and BC getting along? lol never, plus the NDP would probably rule over that new 'country' basically defeating the purpose of the far rightists of Alberta of wanting their own country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 I find it quite funny when they do a poll of BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and they say they'd like to form a country lol. Alberta and BC getting along? lol never, plus the NDP would probably rule over that new 'country' basically defeating the purpose of the far rightists of Alberta of wanting their own country. and this isn't such a far-fetched possibility in the event that québec does separate... what would keep the other 'distinct' areas in the country? BC especially... those mountains make for a very real divider... alberta's would be primarily a financial motivation... would the prairies separate as a unit? then, would the maritimes go their own way? it's about as speculative, in a way, as the 'peaceful' separation of québec from canada... GO :hlogo: GO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 well if we are for some sort of separation then I'd love to see a Cascadia. Baja California, Mexico, California, Oregon, Washington, BC, Yukon, Alaska lol that would freaking rule the world in terms of economic power house and tourist destinations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sakiqc Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 I find it quite funny when they do a poll of BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan and they say they'd like to form a country lol. Alberta and BC getting along? lol never, plus the NDP would probably rule over that new 'country' basically defeating the purpose of the far rightists of Alberta of wanting their own country. Yeah it's funny. That is a sad motive to separate, because of their richness. There's a difference between the separatism of the western provinces and the separatism of QC. Only Quebec can claim to be a nation (on top of that... with a rich history, own language, culture, etc.). If the western provinces separate, it will have bad consequences and we would see a domino effect that will destroy a lot of countries, dividing the rich areas from the poorest. We would see cities in Africa becoming countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Yeah it's funny. That is a sad motive to separate, because of their richness. There's a difference between the separatism of the western provinces and the separatism of QC. Only Quebec can claim to be a nation (on top of that... with a rich history, own language, culture, etc.). If the western provinces separate, it will have bad consequences and we would see a domino effect that will destroy a lot of countries, dividing the rich areas from the poorest. We would see cities in Africa becoming countries. yup. Its super silly. But remember Newfoundland They're actually more patriotic about Newfoundland then Canada more so then Quebecers are to Quebec then Canada. But I don't see a Bloc Newfoundland party in St. John's parliament. But here's the problem. If the PQ says Quebec should go it alone because its 'distinct' from the Rest of Canada or you amend the constitution to say that Quebec is distinct then what's that to stop Ontario, BC, Alberta, Manitoba, Atlantic Canada, etc, from doing the same? Aren't they 'distinct'? The answer is yes Quebec is distinct but putting it into the constitution creates mass havoc that would make other provinces say 'hey aren't we different too?' Then to run on a sovereignist platform by saying we are distinct we deserve our own country shows that the Charlottetown and Meech accords were ploys. ROC gives Quebec 'distinct' status and then the PQ party would then brutally back stab the rest of the country by saying 'that doesn't matter, jokes on you' and push for independence anyway after the accords would have been signed. Basically it comes down to this, most normal people don't need a line in the constitution that says I'm different then my nieghbours. Bottom line Quebec is holding itself back by not signing the constitution, and if the average citzen knew what that dark tunnel ahead known as a soverign Quebec was going to be like, they'd run the other direction. Basically Quebec is the straw and Canada is the camel. Quebec leaves, Canada is fractured beyond repair and Quebec is in ruins because it CAN NOT support itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cataclaw Posted March 25, 2007 Author Share Posted March 25, 2007 ... which is why we should all pray for a PLQ win monday ... Well, i've managed to convince 4 unsure friends to vote PLQ. I hope my efforts are not in vain come monday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 (edited) ... which is why we should all pray for a PLQ win monday ... Well, i've managed to convince 4 unsure friends to vote PLQ. I hope my efforts are not in vain come monday. I wouldn't worry too much about a referendum. Those you have to get off the ground. And, here we go again. In 1995 the Quebec government WASTED it's time on a referendum and what suffered? What was put on the backburner? The federal Liberals's were slashing the deficit as were all the other "provinces" to get their economic numbers in better shape while the PQ had their silly priorities. Question, why was it up to Charest to come in and slash? That process should have happened under the PQ but noooooooooo, can't upset potential "Oui" voters. Slashing deficits (the responsible thing to do at the time) will not create "winning conditions" Why are people upset with Charest that he did that? He did it because the previous government was too busy doing other things. Quebec suffers. I'm getting really sick of this. The PQ's aim if they get power is to govern first and then create winning conditions. The tunnel vision makes me sick. PQ + National Assembly powers = Quebec sinks Edited March 25, 2007 by ATHLÉTIQUE.CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Quebec will separate when the people of the province of Quebec decides so. It is the right to self-determination, which is a recognized international law. It has nothing to do with the ROC loving or hating Quebec (neither Quebec hating or loving them). About the election, it's interesting to see how the ADQ has risen in the charts in the last decade. Makes for a very interesting election. Seems like it could go any way. I didnt expressed myself correctly I meant than Quebecers wont vote for separation. The 49.4 they got in '95 is the highest they will ever go. The interest for the cause just isnt theyre anymore, or else the PQ would be winning very easilly next Monday. Theyrefore the only way Québec ever separate from Canada is if the rest of the country kick us out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.