SpankyMcFarland

Where did you learn this retro vocabulary about Catholics? These days, people with any education in Scotland would be embarrassed by you.

Sorry, I was talking about the lab leak theory.

I’ve seen a lot of talking about this theory right through the pandemic.

Didn’t I just say I have an open mind about this? Far brighter people than me know about the Wuhan lab and they will go wherever the evidence leads but it has be hard and fast. The actual molecular data etc. doesn’t point either way so far. When it changes, I will change my opinion. Whatever the outcome, be it from a lab, a wet market or something else, the PRC has been highly obstructive to finding the truth.

Perception is not reality. If people stop taking vaccines, let me assure you these plagues will reappear. And what about HPV vaccines? They have the potential to virtually eliminate cervical cancer and its precursors which are a significant threat to the health of young women right now. BTW vaccination played a modest role in the 20’th century decline of TB.

The origin of Covid has been an open question since it appeared. I think it remains so. BTW the alternative theory of wet market origin does not reflect well on the Chinese government either.

So what are the dangers of these childhood vaccines? What is the risk of death or serious illness per million vaccinated? And how does that compare to the risk of not being vaccinated?

It doesn’t assume that but in bilateral relations it is often the case. Us talking to the Americans is not like Belgium doing a deal with the Netherlands because the US is a superpower with an economy that dwarfs ours.

I was talking about his entire career in the quote there. It is impressive to me that a private citizen nearing 80 mark and long out of a major political post would still be as engaged as this. Fortunately, up here we’ve learned to put our leaders out to grass quite a bit before that. Re: NAFTA, like any weaker partner in (effectively) bilateral negotiations we can only do our best to get what we can. That’s how it has always been here, and everywhere else in the world. I think we’ve played a bad hand well.

And then there was the after-sales work long after the warranty ran out, maintaining NAFTA: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/us-politics/article-mulroney-worked-to-defend-nafta-legacy-long-after-leaving-office/ Of this man it could be said, ‘I have done the state some service, and they know't’.

Here is a typical Mulroney quip: Of the criticisms that could be leveled against him, not being conservative (as in pro-free market) enough would be a rare one: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-brian-mulroney-canadas-unabashed-champion-of-free-enterprise/?utm_source=infobox&utm_medium=inarticle&utm_campaign=mulroneyinfobox

Political campaigns inevitably focus on unpopular policies and inconsistency in these matters is not a prerogative of any political faction. Look at the shambles of our military procurement. I’m grateful that both Mulroney initiatives have survived to this day.

Mulroney was hardly in a fiscal position to radically reduce the tax burden after the conspicuous spending of the Trudeau years. If we accept that, then aren’t consumption taxes generally more favoured by conservatives than, say, income taxes? The GST’s survival ever since speaks to its effectiveness as a policy. I think it would be less unpopular if it was hidden in the cost of the item but other legislation made that change impossible at the time. One annoying thing, in my part of Canada at least, is buying a pricey item like a car. The sales people inevitably quote the price sans the taxes, not what I really have to pay, which makes me want to walk out immediately. The free trade deal with America was not nothing - it was exactly what most conservatives and many others consider an intrinsically good thing. Indeed, the Americans had to be persuaded to take that plunge as well as the Canadian public. Although an unpopular policy at first that made Mulroney’s life considerably more difficult, he persisted and risked his job over it. Unlike Trudeau, whose career loomed over both him and Chrétien, he was no intellectual - it is said he preferred policy options to be made as simple as possible, sometimes in cartoon form - but he had excellent instincts. NAFTA, the GST and many other initiatives are testimony to that. We needed such pragmatism at that time. Politics is the art of the possible. Any leader who moves too far from the mainstream will fail. Canada’s centre is considerably to the left of America’s and that’s how it is. Here is one assessment of Mulroney’s legacy. For monoglot dunces like me, the English starts around 3.40: In my opinion, Poilievre would do well to give more speeches like this which echo Mulroney’s style somewhat. It was touching. Zingers about the government have their place but voters also need inspiration.

Fenian? That is another tradition. It was the right decision for the country. Is this a joke?

It’s not hard to see why Ukrainians ‘would want to delay the inevitable’ as long as possible. They know exactly what Russian rule will mean.

Mulroney’s verbal skills - he always spoke in well-formed sentences - and those brown envelopes from Mr. Schreiber led many to dismiss him as a con man, Lyin’ Brian, but he got an awful lot done: the Free Trade Agreement was a watershed moment for both Canada and the US, paving the way for NAFTA; the much maligned GST is still with us; and the US-Canada Air Quality Agreement that tamed the acid rain threat gets far less attention than it deserves. What an unlikely rise from Baie-Comeau. Was he our first PM from a working-class background? Although it’s the fate of most politicians, even prime ministers, to fade into obscurity, I think the tributes being paid to him are more than the usual boilerplate responses: https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/brian-mulroney-death-politicians-reactions

We really do have a private health care sector in this country whether we like it or not. And it’s only going to get bigger. A friend of mine just paid a lot of money for the King Charles treatment in another province. But does that cover the entire cost of drugs in BC? Do some people out there not claim they are struggling with those bills? It doesn’t sound like a universal program to me.

As Hitchens remarked, we are all atheists about other people’s gods.

I doubt Israel will ever permit a Palestinian state now, no matter how peaceful and secular the Palestinians become. Netanyahu has made clear in English what he often implied in Hebrew and what his party has always been committed to - an Israeli state from the river to the sea. What this means is permanent, stateless ethnic segregation for Palestinians in the West Bank under 24/7 Chinese-style harassment and surveillance in perpetuity. A South African politician recently objected to the term Apartheid for this system, saying what the Israelis have created is more severe. In any case, it seems destined to last a lot longer.

That sounds rather biblical. Does the next verse mention stoning by any chance?

We have arrived there too in our typically chaotic way. A lot of procedures and drugs are paid for by patients and employers already. BTW Europe’s systems have many differences among themselves. Really? A single universal program? What I see in my province is a higgeldy-piggedly mess of plans that have ‘just growed’ over time. Just in terms of negotiating prices with the drug companies, we’d be better off doing it as one group.

What you are saying applies to Gaza - it seems to be in a doom loop at this stage that will take at least a generation to recover from and hopefully see more secular leadership emerge. But in the West Bank, how can Palestinians build a future there when Israel is clearly intent on paving the place? Where are they supposed to go? Even through this current Gaza crisis, Israeli settlers, often dressed in IDF uniforms, continue to harass and kill Palestinian farmers in an effort to drive them off their land. The other day, plans for thousands more settler houses were announced by America’s ally. The only reasonable thing to do for individuals who can do is to leave which is what Israel wants, of course.

They are in the sense that they and the British took Palestine from them in the 20th century. That’s a fact independent of living standards. Palestinians have done well enough in other countries when they’re given a chance, not least the Arabian peninsula, Central America and Chile, so it’s not unreasonable to surmise they would prosper at home under the right conditions. I’m sure Lebanon and an independent Palestine could do much better than they are doing at the moment if they could end instability in their territories. Their record of indigenous entrepreneurship is stronger than that of, say, Egypt. Of course, only a fraction of the issues holding the ME back have anything to do with Israel.

Advanced countries in Europe can afford universal pharmacare programs. It’s about time we started down that track.

The successful reform of Germany and Japan after WWII gave Americans a highly inaccurate perspective on the effectiveness of regime change. These were two highly advanced and centralized ethnostates keen to avoid Soviet invasion and the ruin it would bring. After Korea, things really went sideways. When I think of state decay the first place that comes to mind is Russia. With his corruption, incompetence and wars, Putin has blighted the prospects of several generations in his country and abroad. Unfortunately, however, authoritarianism may be the default state of government. Democracy is rare in human history and usually does not last long.