dialamah

Not everything has to make 'numeric sense', eh? Every time I give someone on the street a loonie it makes no numeric sense because that loonie is mine, and there are other things I could do with it. Buy half a coffee, for example. If I send money to my favorite dog charity, or to Plan Canada, or contribute $5 to the local food bank at the checkout, that makes no 'numeric' sense because that money adds up and it means I have to do without something that I'm entitled to - a bottle of rye, maybe, or a new pair of shoes, gas in my car to take a weekend trip. Ultimately, no act that helps someone else makes 'numeric sense', whether practiced on a personal scale, or a community or country scale. Why would anyone expect it to?

Not so fast: it seems to have worked, albeit on a smaller scale, and in Canada.

I'm not sure what determining upper/middle and even lower *incomer* has to do with basic income guarantee to remove people from debilitating poverty. Right now, a friend who is on disability gets $900 a month - a whopping $10,800 a year. Her housing - roof/heat/lights - costs her $600 per month, and she's looking for something cheaper, has been looking for nearly two years. She has no tv, no internet (thank goodness for libraries) and only a very basic phone plan and minimal data, $45 per month. She's got $255 for groceries/clothes/everything else. She can access the food bank - every two weeks, and while it's extremely helpful, it doesn't feed her for two weeks. There is a discount food store, again helpful - but mostly stocks outdated 'specialty' foods, plus lots of outdated chips/chocolate. Meat is a luxury, new clothes unheard of, and even buying second hand doesn't happen all that often. The government covers prescription, and about $1000 a year for dental, which I think translates to a couple of cleanings and maybe a filling. Anyway, she rarely has dental care. Government pays around $200 toward glasses every 2 or 3 years, but she has to save up to actually get a vision test and glasses. Can you imagine how much even a guaranteed amount of $15,000 a year would help my friend? I do what I can to help, but I'm not exactly rich either, though obviously much better off than she is. Recently, the prov gov't just took away the $45 annual transit pass, but gave everyone a raise of $77, out of which they can pay a $55 transit pass if they want to -- or walk/stay home. If that $55 pass is absolutely necessary for the person to make dr appointments, go shopping, etc., the government has effectively given a raise of $22 a month. Every bit helps, but how cheap is that, while the crow about how everyone got such a huge raise? The government has, to their credit, raised the amount a disabled person can earn over a year to $9,600 without clawing it back and most people I know on disability do try to get work, but its hard. What employer is overly interested in hiring someone with physical or mental challenges? So in the context of the truly poverty-strickent, defining "low" "medium" and "high" income earners seems pretty irrelevant to me.

Really, what difference does it make? This is about the level of a teenage girl analyzing every nuance of their latest crush's casual "hi, how are you?" ... "OMG", she moans to her friend ... "What did he mean?? Does he like me???" Politicians say stuff in interviews, and of all the things he said in that interview, this seems like one of the least relevant or interesting. Unless you're an American, I guess, since it was an American who asked the question on air, and another American asking it again here.

Soldiers are trained to obey and while it may be true that they can refuse certain duties, I very much doubt it's that simple in real life. Part of the goal of the army (as I understand it) is to build camaraderie, to teach them they can rely on each other, to build a cohesive unit because in a military setting they must be able to trust and rely on each other. If someone decides they can't take part in a particular fight due to conscious, they are likely to be seen essentially as traitors by their comrades. I just don't see that as being an easy thing for a soldier to do. I think that regardless of whether or not I agree with the war we're sending people to fight in (and rarely do), the people who go to those wars on our behalf deserve and should get the very best treatment on their return. That's one of the many reasons I pay taxes, and one of the reasons I do not believe that governments should focus on lowering taxes to the exclusion of everything else. We're in this together, and people should be the priority - not the government bottom line.

Some days I do wish Trump would win; what would the world look like then? How bad would it have to get before his supporters would see the ugliness in him? Or would they ever? I suppose if they are accepting his lies wholesale now, they aren't likely to notice anything amiss if he drives the States right over the cliff. A statement I heard on an historical documentary show last night (about math) "As the empire faded, so did it's intellect." Couldn't help but think of Trump and his supporters. Doubtless the world will survive Trump, even if he does become president. But I think he's more likely guaranteeing another Democrat in the White House. Hopefully, that person does something to address whatever wellspring of hate and fear Trump has tapped into.

I have a cell phone, but no credit card. I've changed my phone number a couple of times. So sure a phone numbet and cell phone is trackable, but is not connected to a person in the way a SIN number or even a driver's license number is.

People change their cell phone numbers all the time, so as a reliable method of tracking someone, its a bust. SIN numbers aren't changeable.

"It will of course increase the number of Liberal voters" Trudeau voters perhaps in the next election, but beyond that and perhaps surprising to you, newcomers actually do make up their own minds about political issues and who to vote for. One immigrant (now citizen) I spoke with recently is dead set against more immigration even though he's only here because Liberal gov't allowed him in 15 years ago. He does not like Trudeau in the least.

Agree with this. Even the three inch heels mandated by a restaurant profiled on Marketplace are enough to create Heath issues. Most places have some kind of dress code, so I don't think that's a problem, but for serve jobs, the choice to dress extra-sexy for tips should be the server's choice rather than the company's directive.

Being a refugee does not equally mean unskilled. They may be dependents at first, but just like other newcomers, they will look for work. Other than fear, there is no proof that immigrants or refugees are a net drain on our economy. Also the article notes that businesses in Albera are crying out for employees, the types of businesses who are looking for unskilled workers. Perhaps they are hoping for more unskilled refugees, than skilled.

Revenge and punishment is not the same as justice. Revenge and punishment are based on emotion, justice is objective.

Exactly my point. There is no one size fits all circumstances. I don't agree with prescribed sentences either, because that approach has been shown to be a failure in the States already.

There is evidence that neither death nor harsh prison sentences deter crimes, but that education and teaching lifeskills, along with community support does. The States has been all about tough on crime for decades, and now they are forced to let people out because they are so overcrowded and can't accept the new bad guys. Thoughtful and consistent rehab works better than emotional, knee jerk and harsh punishments at reducing crime, for most criminals.

I'd say that the people who put up non-English signs on their business are attempting to reach a specific market, and it doesn't include people who don't speak that language. Kinda like bars don't really want non-drinkers in their establishment, or clothing stores who don't really want customers who aren't teenagers. That's how a 'free market' works, isn't it? Getting your panties in a knot because you can't read a sign seems pretty petty, to me, given the number of stores nearby who do put out English signs. Even if those businesses had English signs, my bet is that you still wouldn't be happy because everything in the business would be directed toward those of whatever ethnicity that business was interested in serving. That would include the sales people who would be just as likely to ignore any customers outside their target area. Also, many of these people who come to Canada have had to live with us telling them - subtly and not so subtly - to stay out of our neighborhoods, our communities, our places of business. Acceptance is a two-way street, you know. And, while Canada may be miles ahead of other countries in the 'acceptance' department, there are still a lot of people who barely tolerate or actively resent immigrants and their 'differences', whether it's language, customs or dress. The people who come here, as long as they follow the laws of the land, are entitled to do and live how they wish - just as you and I are. Beyond obeying our laws, they are not required to meet some arbitrary standard of 'Canadian' that you have decided is correct.

Consider these murderers: A woman regularly abuses her husband, verbally and physically; he's been to the hospital twice, once when she threw a pot of boiling spagetti at him and another time when she stabbed him with a knife. Usually, he doesn't react but one day he hits back. He fractures her jaw but also when she falls backward, her head hits the corner of a tile mantel. He immediately realizes the seriousness of her injury and calls for an ambulance but she dies on the way to the hospital. When the police arrive, he tells them exactly what happened. He's arrested and jailed, and put on suicide watch. A woman takes out a protection order against her boyfriend, who has physically abused her. He ignores the protection order by going to her home because he wants to talk to her; while there, they get into an argument which turns physical. He ends up breaking her neck. He leaves, but a week later turns himself in. He's arrested and jailed, and also put on suicide watch. A young man with undiagnosed paranoid schizophrenia gets his father's rifle, and on the way out the door shoots and kills his mother and a visiting neighbor. He gets into the family car and drives to a local supermarket, where he shoots every third person he sees. He kills two more people and wounds three, puts down the rifle and begins walking down the street. When the police pick him up, he's mumbling and arguing with someone they can't see. He says he was told to shoot those people with special bullets so that the world would be safe. He's taken to a psychiatric facility for assessment, and eventually put on medication. Five months later, he's back in touch with reality and in front of a judge. A man is arrested because his DNA has been found on the bodies of six women, all of whom were raped, tortured and killed. He tells the police that there were a lot more, though he won't say who or when. He says he's 'got a problem', and needs help. So these men are all murderers, but have they all committed the same crime, and should they all have the same punishment - to be removed from society with 'no second chance'?

Someone did try to murder my child. Didn't succeed, but it was close. He never even saw court; has been whisked away to a psychiatric facility where he still resides, as far as I know. My 'revenge' brain is angry that he didn't pay the price for trying to kill MY child - a guilty verdict and a hefty prison sentence! But the rational part of me knows that my response is not objective, and because it never can be, it is up to someone else to take all the facts, and make the decision.

Prison is soul-destroying. Tennis courts don't change that. A person incarcerated for a long period of time has trouble functioning in the outside world when initially released; even something as simple to us as going grocery shopping can be beyond their capabilities and just being around people can be scary and exhausting. Prisons are filled with fear, intimidation and violence - whether from other inmates or guards, and some ex-cons exhibit symptoms of PTSD when they are released. Given some of the issues ex-cons face when first out of prison, it's quite a feat when they're able to reintegrate into society. Of course, most of society could care less if these people are even more severely damaged when they come out than when they went in - they deserve it for their crimes. It's short sighted, because damaged people are the ones who commit crimes It'd be much smarter if prisons actually worked to rehabilitate people, but that would not satisfy the desire for revenge and punishment that our society craves. This isn't to say that I think every prisoner *can* be rehabilitated. Some can't be, and those are the ones who should be in prison for life - but those people are a small percentage of prisoners overall. And yes, the victims deserve consideration as well. But since most people are going to be leaving prison at some point, the goal should be more on using that time to ensure they will be able to come out with an ability to function, so they don't end up repeating their criminal behavior and creating another victim. One can have compassion for victims, without simultaneously insisting that the perpetrator be punished in a way that will make him/her more likely to re-offend, rather than less likely.

Not close for me either. Even if BC Chick comments could legitametely be said to have critized the person, Nancy Reagan, she's not at a funeral, and it's doubtful there's anyone here with a personal connection to her. Given that BC Chick criticed a "policy", not a person, your attempted comparison fails even harder.

Teaching kids about drugs is important. 'All drugs are bad and dangerous' makes you a liar when many kids and adults they know use alcohol and marijuana without ill-effect for years, even a lifetime, or when they find out that people can also maintain a heroin addiction and still function normally. Kids are just going to ask themselves .. What other drugs are mommy/daddy clueless about? Teaching them about drugs and to be responsible doesn't mean teaching them how to shoot up. It means teaching them the truth about what's out there, what can happen and how to use legal drugs like alcohol and semi-legal drugs like pot safely. Includes a trip to DTES certainly falls within that education IMO. Communities that expect abstinence and avoid sex ed tend to have highest rates of teenage pregnancy. Education really does seem an effective solution to many social ills.

The John Oliver bit was, in part, a response to Trump's attacks on Jon Stewart for changing his name. Trump attacked Jon for comments he'd made. Trump seems incredibly thin skinned for a politician; perhaps as president he'd make it a capital offense to insult him. To me, the sound of the word "Drumpf" just seems such a good fit for Trump's publc persona - dumb, incoherent, belligerent. Not so much heritage or xenophobia. But no doubt it's a joke with a short shelf life.

Classy liars go over better than asshole liars.

Leadership does not include bullying words or behavior. Bullies can exercise control over others, but that doesn't mean they're 'leading'. Trump is not a leader.

Crime does pay?