I believe we are on the right track with the idea behind strategic voting. Reading about Green Party leader Elizabeth May's hopes and ideas for doing whatever it takes to make sure Prime Minister Stephen Harper is not elected again is nothing short of inspiring. I feel like we are witnessing a real human being amongst a political flophouse, one who said she wants to put progress on climate change and principle above short-term power.
Whatever the major issue may be, should this not be the driving force behind all politicians, working together and combining ideas to seek out what is truly beneficial for the country and not what works for a select few?
Oh yes but I almost forgot this is how the politicians make their money, another topic entirely. Wealth can emerge within our thoughts and ideas and when strong enough they can travel on their own and enter into the collective consciousness of humanity.
All right, let us get back to the vote.
I say we take it a step further, give history something to talk about and combine all of our forces together as one. The Liberals, NDP and Greens should form one party, just for this election, but who knows maybe it will stick.
We could call it Unity and to the Liberals, I apologize, but with a name like that we could not include their plan to extend the war in Afghanistan to 2011. Once voted in, the number of winning seats would be divided by three so that each original party has equal representation. This gives each of those parties' plans more of a chance to come into action rather than not at all.
Let's face it, Liberal leader Stephane Dion, NDP leader Jack Layton and May share similar ideas; they may be worded differently, which really just confuses us, but ultimately they are all on the same page.
I think it is worth a shot.
I would also have to argue that the environment is a step above on the importance scale for this election compared to the economy because with no outside natural world, we cannot have the fake one we created. We need to start by making everyone responsible.
Each household, business and corporation should have an allowable amount of energy usage and pollution output per year. These levels will rise based on increasing numbers of people within a household and employees within a business. Anything above and beyond this amount will be an additional cost that is proportional to each of the facilities' annual income.
Thus corporations that go over this established environmental law will pay a substantial amount. It is obvious that this is something that will be tricky to enforce since corporations rule the world, but I say if they do not accept then let them take their business elsewhere.
More jobs will emerge with energy-efficient ideas and the country will in turn become stronger with less unnecessary production of "stuff" that we really do not need.
This will give us more space to think and more time to love and care for the environment. I am asking you, for the sake of nature and humanity, to do whatever it takes. We need a group of humans willing to compromise with one another for a better country, not a soulless leader who will run it into the ground.
Taylor Carr