News + Opinion » Letters

Letters to the editor, August 20, 2015

These are the letters and comments from the print edition

1 comment

Efficient career building

Love stories that show there are other routes than killing your financial future with university ("How to be a crane operator," The City by Thoshlae Smith, August 13). Great topic. —posted by Brandon Wilcox at

Heft on the left

Hey Isaac, we can make this happen ("It's time to merge Canada's progressive parties," Voice of the City by Isaac J. Hansen, August 13)!  Totally agree—time to end this juvenile crap. —posted by Tom Jorgensen

A++. If only Trudeau played well with others. —posted by ruddy

I'm sorry, but I can't agree to this. As broken as our democracy has become under the leadership of Harper, creating what amounts to a two-party system is not the solution.

You need only look to the US to see why this is the case—as broken as our democracy is, theirs is in much worse shape. I realize the American system of government is nothing like the Canadian system (or practically any other democracy), but it's easy to see that the two-party dynamic exacerbates all the worst features of their system, and it's hard to imagine the same wouldn't happen here too. —posted by Michael Braedley

It's official—The Coast has now sunk to the intellectual level of the Dalhousie Gagzette. "Hey Kerensky, whaddya say we unite to run the Duma?" "Sure Vladimir Ilyich, I see no possible downside to that..." —posted by TarzanBoy

In theory this idea is absolutely delightful. No split vote and some sort of unity between party lines, so that Canada's centre-left comes together and has a great fucking time. Unfortunately, a two-party system restricts input and leads to gridlock.

An amalgamation of the NDP, Liberals and Greens into the Reparative Party (awesome name by the way) would inevitably result in a single party that is dominated by one of the three. The party that commits the most to the caucus will come to dominate the proceedings between the three and determine party policy. This restricts the amount of dialogue that comes into play and the amount of different populist perspective. The Reparative Party would just come to be dominated by whichever of the NDP, Liberals or Greens contributed the most members, meaning that the entire Canadian political climate has far fewer public opinions represented.

Secondly, a two-party system fuels gridlock, as it turns parliament into Government and Opposition, rather than Government, Opposition and the Swing. Additionally, a two-party system means that any government will be a majority government, which is a rather dangerous game to play.

As great in theory as it would be to combine Canada's left wing in order to reduce vote splitting, such a scenario would just mean that different opinions would fall to the wayside and a Parliament would be cut only in half, which is dangerous for a lot of reasons. —posted by Tom Callum Fraser

Get on the grass

HRM, A City Challenged by All Seasons. Add line-painting, pavement/pothole and sidewalk management to the list with the mowing problems ("Halifax is doing a terrible job cutting grass this summer," The City by Jacob Boon, posted August 10 at Very disappointing performance, it will bite the mayor and city councillors in the ass come next election time. We deserve better—forget about being bold, just be average and deliver basic municipal services! —posted by Postman

In a time where most nations recognize that we are in a critical climate crisis, the city should not have tracts of lawn (not used for sport) that are so large they need gas-powered mowers to maintain. They must have grass-free groundcover, be managed by hand-mowers and animals or returned to forest. Such short-sighted priorities are more common to see in major news outlets and uninformed citizen complaints than in The Coast. —WWSD



Showing 1-1 of 1


Add a comment

Remember, it's entirely possible to disagree without spiralling into a thread of negativity and personal attacks. We have the right to remove (and you have the right to report) any comments that go against our policy.