cannuck

Argus: I know you mean well, but you fail to understand what role government wants to play. By taking in massive chunks of the money in the country, they get to pick winners and losers in re-distributing said money. For example: billions to CBC to propogate the agenda of the left. Notice the 300 billion to Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick - wanna guess how they vote? Now, letting government pick winners and losers is, as you might imagine, a really, really stupid idea. I have yet to see a government on this planet that could organize a piss up at a brewery, but we entrust them with the future of our planet??? Get serious. Then, there is the REAL agenda: funding agencies that can not only pick winners and losers, but also benefit directly to the back door money to the party, and to "retired" political figures. SNC pretty much the poster child for that kind of stuff. The business of government should be to govern - i.e. regulate and enforce fair and level playing field in which the economy can work to respond to market forces. Instead, we allow them to dispense privilege - which is IMHO the absolute key point of what defines good vs. bad in government and administration.

We, the people ELECTED said traitor, and his Father.

Our western heavy (WCS) blend is selling at a great discount because it is not the kind of thing a simple refinery (complexity in single digits) can use. The bituminous fraction (considerable) requires upgrading to feed a significant portion of refineries that now exist. We SHOULD have been able to rush in behind Venezuela when Maduro screwed up so badly that Orinoco crudes were no longer welcome on the Gulf coast, but the fantastic increases in shale (and other) light/medium crudes from advances in reservoir fracturing means our normal export target market is flush with lighter/better feedstock. IF we had a pipeline to Cushing way back a decade or two ago, we could have replaced Orinoco, but so long after the fact, many refineries have been reconfigured to use lighter feedstocks - and as I said, those are now plentiful. Yes, Government is a big part of the problem, but the real issue is that we don't have much oil on tidewater - which is how one exports anywhere but to our convenient neighbour. BTW: I am still waiting for one of those subsidies to show up in my mailbox or bank account.

Government should continue to provide the sick care insurance as it does now. What it should NOT continue is to monopolize service delivery. Yes, they should - as does most of the rest of the developed world - still operate service delivery but NOT have a monopoly. Our government sick care insurance should pay out public or private delivery of insured services at equal rate. What could THEN follow is the ability for those who choose to buy supplemental sick care insurance to have better access to faster/better services. Those with real money do just that now, self insured and simply go to the best provider available internationally.

For this, I will never forgive Harper. As with most Conservatives (and few conservatives) he was gutless and mindless in not resolving the problem of state funded propaganda. Canada has no business funding the "free press". From there, consider that the Libs paid out something like $2.2 Bn of taxpayers' dollars to sell the publik on political correctness, LPC style. Sadly, if Dimples Milquetoast had been elected, CBC would stay right where it is. Best hope for Canada is for the Turdeau situation to end in early election and for the CPC to finally grow a pair and put a real leader in place.

I have ignored Don Cherry for decades, since I have no respect for stick and ball nonsense. BUT: when he spoke his mind - and carefully at that - and gets fired over not being politically correct, he rose into my circle of those who I can respect. At 85, he doesn't have anything to prove, and after that many years, you know yourself well enough, but not everyone has the stones to stand up and be counted when it matters. He does/did.

Seeing as how I live in SK, where such stupidity is completely avoided (although we have enough of OTHER stupidity to make up for it) I can find no reason whatsoever why anyone would be so foolish as to "change time" for some long forgotten and totally irrelevant reason. Time zones? I can live with that, but notice that China does very well with only ONE time zone (and of course no DST) and a lot less confusion about who is at their desk when. I have friends and business interests in the UK, and it is something I slap them with regularly. How is it that the keeper of "Greenwich Mean Time" is silly enough to use DST??????

This election was Scheer's to lose, and lose it he did - big time. While I can identify easily with Max, he is not the man that CPC and Canada needed as leader, but he sure as hell was the one who needed to be a voice in shadow cabinet and cabinet. The party screwed up royally electing Scheer and pushing Max out the door. He lost by less than 2% and THAT is what divided the party and killed off a LOT of traditional Conservative/conservative support. BTW: I am told from inside the LPC that the total bill to the media of cash through the front door and back door was well over $2 Bn. Is THAT what we call "democracy" in action?

I have been around various parts of that fossil fuel industry upstream, midstream and downstream for about a half century, and have as yet to see any "subsidy" of any kind. In fact, quite the opposite for royalties, taxes, permits, licenses, bonding, etc. Put those same costs on the unicorn fart industry, and it is even MORE ridiculously expensive.

Uh....it seems we have sought the ultimate in stupid people to BE Prime Minister, not just once by accident, bit TWICE in a row! I have had the incredible good fortune for a half of a century to be married to an educator who specializes in exceptional children, and to have seen first hand what it takes to raise and educate exceptional children. All that applies to gifted or challenged children applies to "average" children (I will tell you that in my experience, there is simply no such thing as an "average" child, just billions of similar individuals). What educators and neuro-scientists will tell you, and what we don't seem to understand as a body politic, is that childrens' learning abilities start at birth, and slowly decline with time. IMHO, intellectual capacity is hereditary, but the functionality of the mind is very much a factor of environment/learning. Problem is: there is simply no way that some government institution can in any practical terms come anywhere near meeting the phenomenal learning capacity of a baby, a toddler, a "pre-schooler" or a student. It can contribute, it COULD support, but the mega-hours, one-on-one time that an infant or toddler requires to meet their very special learning needs is something that only a parent (or grandparent, close relative, etc.) is likely able to provide. Problem is, we as a society don't teach them how to do this, we instead sell the idea that you have to have "location, location, location" real estate, and that will take full time employment from Mom and Dad to pull that off in most of this country. So, who is raising the kids during their first, and highest learning capacity times? It is a function you can NOT "job out" to contractors in "day care" storage facilities. In spite of having one of our kids with degrees in food science and education (and a couple of other things), I can not say that I have ever discussed nutrition as a separate component of education/intellect with her. As you can imagine, nutrition is at the core and fully integrated with a great deal of things to her, it is just something (school lunch) that I have asked. I am willing to accept that a hungry child may not be paying attention or be able to concentrate as well as a nutritionally satisfied child, but a school lunch IMHO is not going to solve the much larger problem of who CAN actually meet a child's educational needs. What I can say from experience, is to raise two children with a pretty decent education relative to their needs was a full time, 24/7, 100% effort of more than 20 years for my wife, and that for our grandkids (7 in two families) it requires her help to pull it off with 2 stable, 2 parent families. Stick those same kids in some kind of government institution, and they will get only a tiny fraction (albeit, in SOME cases, a very well done tiny fraction) of their needs and abilities met. So, what I am saying is simple: if you want your children to be well educated, it is YOUR responsibility, not mine.

Locking up drug dealers certainly doesn't work. All they get as "punishment" is a broader exposure to the criminal network, and training on how to be a better criminal...and it costs us a fortune to host them in the University of Crime.

No, I did not. I said dealers deserve to die by the hand of the state. I think I was clear in implication that drug use for many is a death sentence.

No desire to punish the addicts - they are doing that to themselves. That is, of course, unless you think removing their easy access to drug supplies is what you condsider "punishment". Sorry if your drug induced haze makes it impossible for you to rationally consider what will be needed (and will in one way or another will happen) to either make our species sustainable or extinct.

It is not bad for me. l have no need nor desire to use intoxicants of any kind. If our vastly overpopulated gene pool is ever going to be able to be reduced to a sustainable level, some of those who take advantage of such weakness of character as substance abuse should be the first to go. Many of those who are careless abusers will take care of themselves - best they do so before reproducing. Problem is: many addicts will take out the wrong people either when driving or robbing to finance their addiction.

Uh....selling drugs to kids and adults "shouldn't be illegal???????" Geez, is your head f#cked up

Would feel bad about it, but when you choose a life of crime, you need to be prepared for the consequences. If my kids had ever been so incredibly stupid, I would consider it to have been my fault for being soft on principals, values and personal responsibility. Neither myself, and far more to the point my wife would ever have wandered over to the left side of life and the endless compromises that would be required.

Don't care what kind of shit you call it, but IMHO nobody dealing drugs has any right to live. Would make me feel all warm and fuzzy to see their brains splattered all over the wall.

The whole Max deal happened because one of Boeing's largest airline customers was about to sign for hundreds of Airbus machines with their new LEAP engines, that offered far better fuel economy than the NexGen 727 could deliver. It was either lose one of their biggest clients (and leadership in the biz) or figure out how to get the same CFM engines to fit on the much shorter landing gear 737. They new damn well they needed a new airplane, but that would be years to design and certify, while Airbus simply would have walked away with the whole market then dominated by the most popular commercial airplane in history (the 727). Once they started down that road, they found that the aerodynamics of the larger engine placed further forward (so the LEAP fan would not drag on the ground...literally) would result in divergent pitch behaviour (it would pitch up at very low airspeeds more than the pilot was commanding). The solution was to throw in some nose down trim to make it feel and behave exactly as any other 727 would. IF Boeing had to add more training, or if they had to admit to such an invasive level of automation ( Boeing's design philosophy is to have live pilot as ultimate control authority) it would have been impossible to grant certification as another variation of the 737. Since the FAA has let industry essentially self-certify, it was easy for Boeing engineers and execs to do a "nudge-nudge, wink-wink" certification. As has been implied: the relationship between Boeing and the Feds was far too cozy and sloppy. Now, on the other hand, the real issue was that as certified, there was only one reference source (AOA vane) as the sole source of pitch info. The second was optional, but since buyers had no GOOD idea what MCAS was, most did not opt for the second vane on the other side of the airplane. It was not a software coding problem (at least on one of the two crashes) but a failed AOA vane that commanded the excessive nose down trim. In training for ANY aircraft with automated trim, one of the basics is to know how to deal with a trim runaway. Several instances in the Western world Max aircraft suffered exactly the same failures, and in each and ever case, the pilots dealt with it almost as a routine part of the flight. The pilots of both crashes were, to be polite, totally incompetent. MCAS only works with take off power and flaps in takeoff position. Not only could they not deal with a reasonably simple runaway trim (one solution for that was to simply switch it off, as it said in the video explaining the new airplane) but they left the airplanes in a very unusual and improper configuration. The reason this is a genuine problem is that for most of the last decade, the US not only lead but DEFINED the world of commercial aviation, and for the most part, Western training and culture meant that pilots earned their respective right and left seat positions on merit. In many developing nation cultures, such jobs are granted based on privilege due to family and birthright. A perfect fit for the automation-dominant Airbus fleet, but goes to hell in a handbasket at times when you need an actual pilot at the controls. Oh: and seconding the comments on how safe commercial aviation has become and public expectations.

absolutely spot on. Many reasons. First, and foremost: we have such a mindless desire to immitate the US where the business economy (Main Street) has only ever been able to pay a single digit income by creating wealth, whereas the speculative genie that sunk them in 1929 has been let back out of the bottle, and investment money instead of going into business to create wealth is going into banks/finance with the hope that Casino Capitalism (Wall Street, Bay Street) will reward the gambler/speculator with higher returns...that BTW create absolutely zero wealth. The US once had a vibrant business financing world to would put money into the hands of entrepreneurs, but we stifled that decades ago, first with our habit of going branch plant with offshore owners and then going with finance instead of business for our investment habits. We never DID get that foundation of entrepeneurship to support growth from startup to full bore big manufacturing. Finally: we have come to believe it is the business of government to pick winners and losers and support big business. Partly because we are economically idiots, and partly because we are politically corrupt all to hell in trying to cater to the whims of criminals in PQ who masquerade as business (notice my incredible restraint in not once mentioning either SNC, Power Corp or Bombardier).

The correct way to deal with China is NOT with tariffs, but enforcement of standards for participating in our marketplace. When a Chinese manufacturer can prove that have manufactured goods with procedures and materials that have been proven to meet our standards for environmental protection, intellectual property protection, employment standards and other business practices that are REQUIRED of North American manufacturers, THEN and ONLY THEN should any particular product be allowed onto shelves here. There WAS a time that we had to and should have held our nose and let the Chinese sell pure garbage to anxiously awaiting Canadian and US import buyers, as open trade is what allowed China to re-join the rest of the world. Today, the Chico party uses such "blind eye" attitudes to be predatory in destroying potential competitors, not competing with them, so those days SHOULD be long gone. But, with an absolute moron in the PM's chair, and a band of dingbats for a cabinet, don't expect diddly squat to change. And, yes, Mr. Trump may indeed be a bit of an a-hole, but he is the only world leader with the sense and balls to call China out on these matters. Just wish he would do it my way instead of the tariff way.

drug use destroys lives, and when it comes to some, kills them as well. Giving them more support for their drug lifestyle (which is very much part of the culture of North America - especially the USA) is only making it worse, not better. The Saudi princes don't sell their drugs in KSA, they, just as do the Latino cartels sell into the huge demand of our drug culture. We have about 6 billion too many people on this planet, so, honestly, losing a few million who are there to exploit the societal weakness is really not a big deal. Not my place to regulate or enforce. It is what governments and the totally screwed up, ineffectual UN are there to do. Most are too busy selling drugs to do anything about it.

Ell: your complaint and observation are not out of line. The reason CEOs get paid far more money these days is that corporate ownership and governance is increasingly falling into the hands of financial institutions. They appoint board members who are their representatives, but seldom with any actual skin in the game. The reason they own the company is to play finance games with the potential speculative value of the stock from trading or end game M&A plays. They, in turn, hire "board/bank friendly" officers, who, since they are not answering to entrepreneurs, but bankers/financiers simply rob the shareholders blind with their compensation packages. There IS a simple solution - which few politicians have the brains or balls to address: simply tax the crap out of capital gains and stop taxing dividend income. This will put business back in the hands of business people, not finance people.

Meanwhile: they don't have a drug problem. We do.

Not at random. But, public beheadings for murder, dealing drugs (which is essentially murder by stages), etc. would help return some kind of law and order.

Obviously, it can NOT be faked. You can be duped into buying whatever, but that doesn't make it other than what it is - a shiny piece of something that a bank sold you. When I walk into a bank here, I encounter someone at the till that has no idea what a bank is or how it works, never mind understanding precious metals or of course business. You would trust them to sell gold?????