cannuck

I can agree to some extent. I also spend a lot of time with large animal vets, and can tell you that none I know are going to risk treating a dangerous animal without mitigating the risks with restraint or sedation. One of my daughters has stared down Mountain Gorillas in Uganda, and palpated wild lions on the Serengeti, so I am very aware of the risks she has taken there, but in domestic practice, she will never put herself at such a high level of danger. We also have children who are soldier, firefighter and law enforcement officer. In those jobs, there is also a strong shift in thinking as to how to carry out their duties with less risk, but the difference is that the veterinarian does NOT have to assume that level of risk but when the real crap hits the fan, the others do not have much choice. Even a truck driver has seat belts, protective cab, hours of service limits, etc. that will keep him alive if he or she uses them as intended.

Gee, I am one of those farmers and I have yet to have anyone take a shot at me (although if you were to come into my yard to steal something...). You think being a cop is "far less dangerous"????? Any farmer has the choice to make his job as safe or as dangerous as he chooses, a cop, soldier or firefighter does not have that luxury when they are doing what their job can entail.

Your view is different from mine. As our so-called "democracy" operates right now, the balance of power rests very strongly in the hands of the extremely wealthy and extremely effective lobbyists and communicators. The power SHOULD be with "the people", but not just in general, but in some respect reflecting what they contribute to the country, not what they take from it. In my own view of how representation should be, I would make partisanship in any form completely illegal, same for lobbying. Same for running up any debt. If you spend the money, it should be repaid during your term of office so that the tax bill directly reflects what YOU did during office, not passing the bill to my/our grandchildren for you to buy votes today.

It is not a question of one person's value, but one person's actual sacrifice, be it financial or risk. Since the business of government is not only to govern, but to spend the money collected from those who have to earn it, that IMHO should give those who do so a proportionate level of influence on who gets to represent them and spend their money. The precedent is simple: under 18 children do not get to vote, so no great stretch to grant that others who depend on the state should have a vote, but not necessarily THE vote. I was dashing out a quick post in between other tasks, and should have included firefighters and law enforcement officers (in the field, not in the office) along with military. Getting your brains blown out by a criminal, enemy or collapsing building is simply a level of service to the public that NOBODY else has to make. You see military as dedicated to taking lives, most of the rest of us can see that they are tasked with doing some very dangerous things to protect us from having our lives (or those of our allies) taken.

Computers can be wonderful things. My solution: each person with a SIN and citizenship (easily identified) gets one vote. Then, for certain things, you get a vote voucher for an extra vote. Military service, for instance, an extra vote for each 5 years or so. Paying income tax: an extra vote for each $20k or so of Fed for fed elections and similar number for provincial tax paid for provincial elections.

You are very correct, but none of this will happen until we (both sides of the border) realize that you can't run an economy on speculation. Someone has to actually go to work and create wealth by adding value to a commodity or delivering a NECESSARY service in support. Main street in the US has a ready domestic market (albeit one that must now service $20 TRILLION in debt) whereas Canada has 10% of that market, but spread over a very long distance. To do value added processing, our habit is to imitate or branch subsidiary out to the US. Problem is: costs up here make it impossible to do the same-same except in very limited circumstances (auto industry being prime example). We simply don't have protection against restrictive interstate business that is written into US law and business culture. As a result, input costs for materials, equipment, support and transportation are much, much higher. We must learn to concentrate in things we do best that are unique to our situation - but business here is just not that sophisticated in strategic planning or thinking. Worse yet: a significant part of the business community and pretty much 100% of academia believes that government should have some role in financing, managing, planning and even executing business ventures!!! We tend to be technically highly competent but lack any real depth in management, finance and entrepreneurial culture.

You need to allow for the fact that Canada has 1/10th of the population of the US - thus our counter-investment is similarly proportioned. HOWEVER: it is the preponderence of US investment here, plus the very unfortunate charactaristic of the Canadian econmy being seconded to banking and finance (as is the case in the US) that results in very little value added processing - thus wealth creation is extremely limited to resource extraction. Sadly, we copy the US by letting finance have our cash to play with, but since Manhattan sucks up most of that money, it goes to work South of the 49th. The exception of course is in Ontario, where 70% of all Canada/US trade takes place in the automobile industry. In my case, US investment (in real business, not Casino Capitalist Wall Street crap) is about the same ratio as to population - 10x more to the US side than Canada. It remains to be seen how much China will change that picture - as that is where there are still new markets emerging that we can service.

What does the US owe Canada? Simple: tit for tat in free and open access for investement and trade. US companies own HUGE stakes in Canadian resources, which we have allowed it to do with relative freedom from restrictions and unfair taxation. Doing so has resulted in stifling the value added production that SHOULD have happened in Canada (that's not on the US, that is what Canadians did to themselves by giving money to Wall Street and Bay Street instead of investing directly in Main Street.) As for Canada not contributing to NATO: Yesterday we had a parade adding theatre honours to the colours of Canada's oldest volunteer regiment - as did 64 other Canforce units for Afghanistan. This was the longest military engagement for Canada in its entire history and was done simply because our closest ally was attacked. It was initiated with considerable political capital at risk by a Liberal government and similarly sustained by the Conservatives. I also recall very well allowing American military forces to have free and complete access to Canadian territory to build the Distant Early Warning line - all on Canadian soil. We were quite willing to paint a great big target on our chest in support of the country with which we share the longest unprotected border in the world and a fully integrated economy. It is an insult and piss off when an American ignorant of such things cannot recognize and respect such contributions to their defense and well being.

very large paper route before 10, picked fruit and did odd jobs until 12. Moved to different part of country, shot gophers for farmers when I got there. First contracting when 14 (assembling grain bins). For the next 50 years after high school, have been usually self employed. My work and investment supports many families in 5 companies in 3 countries. Used to work 3x4hrs 7 days, now usually 8-10hrs x 6 days, but that will change this year as we bought a farm on which I need to set up a business, build barn, shops, greenhouses and house. I still remain on call for one former JV for emergency callouts to any one of 16 offices in Canada and the US (thus in declared emergencies, no hours of service limits apply). Yeah, we right wing capitalist pigs are a layabout lot. But, you are right. It WAS an assumption - but referring not to employment but to the left wing attitudes of entitlement and use of social services, government as a master, etc. I should have made that clear, my appologies (tax time, so visits here are break from true madness).

First of all, just because something is in law, that does not in any way mean it is right. While those of you who seem to think the world owes you a living and you can just sit back and take a free ride, that is your privilege that is there because some of those who went before had the courage to challenge and change the law to what it is. That also means law and policy must be changed to crrect the increbible abuses that politicians, and in this case terrorists as well have inflicted on their privilege to use the law as it either exists or is being interpreted. I will claim some high ground here, because I HAVE spent the time, money and other sacrifices to contribute to changing law in this country. The next change I wish to see is the totally irresponsible government that we have in Ottawa be relagated to a dark page in our history. Your comment about being "racist" is simply the stock reply from the left wing of the politically correct movement. I have stated before, and will repeat that EVERYONE is "racist" to some extent. That is not some kind of sin or flaw, it is simply reality. To throw that around simply because you assume I am caucasian is just what I would expect from you. I pity your myopia but welcome you expressing your view as an example of what is the status quo today . BTW: terrorism is not a racial thing, in the case of Omar and his family, it is the crime that they were (and probably still are) engaged in.

It's my country, with which I do NOT agree on accommodating, encouraging and supporting terrorists. You are free to leave if this doesn't suit you.

The Yanks kept a terrorist out of circulation for eight years. they should have sent us a bill

That is probably true for value added (manufactured) goods, but I suspect our resource exports knock that out of the ballpark.

When Americans learn to invest their money on Main Street, where it can create wealth and jobs instead of throwing it all at Wall Street where the Casino Capitalists add no value at all, create no wealth, and create no jobs, maybe things will change. While Yanks are so busy rolling the dice at the casino, waiting for their lottery win or trying to sue their neighbour - while consuming vast quanities of scrips, OTC and recreational drugs, it is left for the productive part of the world to meet the consumer and business demands of the USA.

We share culture, language, border, transportation and economic systems with the US - thus why it make all of the sense in the world to prefer trading there. For example: Euroweenies drive cars, Canadians drive pickups, SUVs and other slovenly pigs made and driven by the US. We sell parts to make those things from here, and buy the value added end product. We don't share technical standards with Europe or Asia, and South America is too socialist and Africa is too screwed up to have any money, so why would we want to trade there?? Our problem in business is not too much trade with the US, it is not nearly enough. Try to manufacture anything here, and you will quickly learn that you can buy the same inputs South of the 49th for half the price.

Thanks for catching that. Yes, Hellyer was indeed one of the Red Torries under that nitwit Pearson, but nothing was really done to impact the forces until Trudeau was in with Cadieux as Minister (some gift!!). I think it was '69 when the crap really hit the lilly pad.

Impact: I can't tell you the volume, but I can give you a pretty good idea of how things work: someone in procurement calls up Bombardier and based on their largess at the time to contributing to the well being of political parties and politicians, they will be asked how they would like to take a simple $x value piece of equipment, get involved with assembling and/or modifying that proven design to the point where it becomes a proper POS at a value or $3xxx - and the forces will have yet another extremely expensive and ineffective solution to a real need. Ever since PET, the armed forces have nothing to do with defence and 100% simply a tool for social engineering and propping up PQ for votes and "benefits". Doesn't matter who is in power.

You have been looking at transverse mercator projections. Russia is right on the other side of the Arctic Ocean, and summer or winter, they don't need to drive or float, they just need to hop into some airplanes (that they have in abundance). Problem is, they are ALREADY "invading" (violating Canadian sovereignty) in the arctic, as has the US on many occassions. Having a bunch of nukes is not the solution, but having a presence IS - and an appropriate role for our military,

That lap dog is very much a Pekingese. What seems to be ignored in spades is that while Canada does not have literal "enemies", we have massive exposure and violations of our sovereignty throughout the Arctic. We REALLY need a much larger military budget, equipment and presence to even be able to maintain our legal claim to that region. BTW: that job is done by Rangers - who deserve far better training, equipment and support. If you want to inlcude the Innu population in Canada, that is how we can do so. What Trump has pointed out correctly is that we also have formal comittments to our allies - and we are not living up to those obligations. Instead of destroying our own country by importing a million potential terrorists and parking them right on the most undefended border to the US (no doubt to SQUEALS of joy from PETs mentors), we should be ponying up to what has been decided by many nations to maintaining world order.

I agree, but I did happen to notice that there was a lot more budget to be raided under Harper. I was raised in the military, and we have a brigade officer in the immediate family serving now, so I get to have a peek inside the kimono regularly. Things were not great under McKnight, but IMHO MacKay did really well at it. Much to my surprise, Sajjan is pretty much ineffective - in spite of being a reserve colonel who has served in combat.

Canada's military is weak and decimated because of Pierre Elliot Trudeau and his minion, Paul Hellier. When our dearly beloved fellow traveller tucked his Communist Party card into his wallet and came back to Canada, he remained resolutely on a path that seems to have been more beneficial to his ideological heroes than Canadians. What a stroke of political genius: take the soft underbelly of the US (i.e. Canada) and take the institution that defined us as a new and strong nation at Vimy Ridge and turn it into a social experiment. Not more than a few weeks after the White Paper, I saw francophone junior NCOs who had virtually no prospects of ever having more than two hooks on the sleeve be solicited to become officer candidates. Once they removed the uniforms from the various services, the Trudeau job of destroying the morale of the forces was complete. The acorn did not follow far from the tree (although it did not seem to inherit much of the gray matter - how Kardashian of it). Rewarding terrorists for killing allied soldiers and depriving the services and veterans of what they need to be effective is page right out of the old man's play book. Embarrassing the rest of the country with his buffoonery is just a bonus.

Yeah, things do seem to be improving....he didn't sneak $10mm into this murdering terrorist's back pocket (yet).

If a criminal wants to buy a gun, you REALLY think he gives a rat's ass if he can obtain it legally or not???

You obviously have not been around agriculture. Big agribusiness is deeply involved in supplying services and consumables, and even deeper into the value added side of crops once they leave the farm. Not very many large farms belong to corporations that are not simply the farmer himself who has incorporated his enterprise. Since 50% of all farmers and 70% of all farmland under cultivation in Canada is in Saskatchewan, pretty much ANYTHING to do with ag has to do with SK. Land ownership IS a big deal here, and there is some controversy, but by and large, it is very difficult for non-residents to own it. Here is a good summary: http://www.albertabeef.ca/content/saskatchewan-changing-farm-ownership-laws Single (cultivated) farms of 10,000 acres and up are not uncommon here at all, but they very much belong to the farmer who farms it. I am a small farmer, really a hobby farmer but it is hard not to know what is going on in the mainstream of agriculture if you live here. BTW: to get closer to the thread topic - I used to manufacture ag equipment, principal market was aboriginal.

It is indeed VERY socialistic when the state requires that farmers participate. It is also an incredible distortion to markets and screws up our ability to trade. BTW: it is illegal to sell dairy unless you own a quota, period. I don't think there is ANY option available. Not sure about eggs and chicken. The CWB started as a voluntary deal during the depression, and that was fine. Participation became mandatory during WWII to guarantee supply to England. However, once government realized that they could play the politics of food, they just left the mandatory part in place. The original idea was adopted during one of the bleakest periods in the history of modern economies. Canadians were looking at all kinds of political, monetary and economic alternative systems in the hope of getting out from under their problems. BUT: when the Wheat Board was in its younger years, the average farm was tiny by today's standards. Viable grain farms are at LEAST one section today, but normal is several. Someone with tens of millions of dollars invested in land and equipment is not likely to want to entrust their business to a bunch of bureaucrats. When this was tested by vote ten years before it was wrapped up, the problem was that it was one vote for one farm, when it really should have been one vote for one acre. The little farmers and hobby farmers tended to want someone else to handle the sales, but the people that actually produced significant quantities as a real business wanted no part of it. If the laughing stock of "constitutions" was ever applied, the forcing of someone to do this and especially the discrimatory application of location would keep anything so stupid from lasting a minute.