?Impact

When using OECD data, it would be helpful if the real OECD data were actually looked at. It would be important to note that Canada and Norway for example are singled out as not using the same metrics as other nations. The CTV article above is not about an OECD report, but rather one written by KPMG. What is missing from the "wait times" survey that KPMG took is the effect of the walk-in clinics operated by many primary health care physicians - that is a glaring oversight.

You are right, there has been zero progress in computer technology in the past 50 years. We are still flying vacuum tubes with less power than a slide rule.

... that Canadian health care costs are middle of the pack. Yes, when you ignore the big picture and exclude many factors like dental, public higher education (in exchange for lower wages for many health-care workers), then you can present a biased argument to further the get rich scheme of the private health insurance industry and the far right extremists.

Exactly, we need to understand the mission and then pick the right aircraft. Why are we spending billions to fly around a fighter pilot when an unmanned platform would address most of our requirements and offer may superior advantages.

There is no such thing as "European health care", it varies from country to country. In many cases public health care in European countries includes many of the privatized practices we have in Canada, like dental. What about the higher eduction system in France that produces the health-care professionals, are we going to replicate that? This grass is always greener proposal lacks any clear analysis of the bigger picture. What is really amusing is those who use it most are the same one that continually rally against the "Euro Trash" for every thing else.

Try the deregulation capital of the world - Texas b.t.w. The woman in the story you cite is using over 8 times the electricity that I use. Does she have electric heat?

You are taking the peak charge that is applicable for only 6 hours/day, and totally ignoring the off-peak charge (8.7c) which is applicable for 12 hours/day, and all weekends and statutory holidays. When you base a rate on 17% of the time and ignore 65% of the time, you are obviously extremely biased. Seriously is right, do a proper comparison. At least Hydro Quebec attempted to do an apples for apples comparison. It may not be perfect, but it is far better than what you are quoting.

Force does not bring unity, although it might bring more stability and less violence.

Facts are generally able to be backed up with evidence. What evidence do you have for this statement: I've watched Ontario's incompetent Liberals run its electricity system into the ground over the past ten years and give us the world's most expensive electrical power. If you use Hydro Quebec's most recent comparison of electricity prices in major North American cities, you will find 2 Ontario cities (Ottawa & Toronto). It lists Charlottetown & Halifax as more expensive than Ottawa, and both of those and Regina as more expensive than Toronto. From American cities listed, San Francisco, Detroit, Chicago, New York, and Boston are all higher than Ottawa, and all of those plus Nashville are higher than Toronto. If you go around the world you will find that Canadian and American prices are at the low end. China and India are a bit lower than the Canadian average, but not as low as Quebec, Manitoba, and BC. Major European countries are anywhere from 2-3 times that of Canada, with Denmark being almost 4 times.

I guess thoughtful engaging conversation is dead, long live Trumpland.

Sorry, but your assumption is completely wrong. Participating in the program gave us the option of purchasing, or more specifically a place in line. There was no commitment to purchase made. The investment was a benefit to Canadian aerospace industry.

Other than some cryptic reference to CTV news channel, you have provided zero in terms of actual details. With no leg to stand on, you are just making your usual Liberal-bad rant. According to the fact sheet at the PMO: Canada providing technical assistance to support Argentina’s pledge to accept refugees from Syria and neighbouring countries, including in the areas of private sponsorship and refugee integration into Argentine society.

Let's build huge refrigerators to cool down the planet, and pumps to lower the oceans. I hear we can get cheap parts from China. b.t.w., in both 2014 and 2015, coal plants in China were running at lower capacity than in previous years because new solar, wind, and nuclear were more than enough to address the growth in demand. in 2014 more than 80% of that growth was in renewables, and in 2015 some large nuclear came on stream and renewables were only about 60% of the growth. So yes, China is building coal plants to ensure they have the capacity to accommodate surges in growth but continue to invest in renewables. They are projecting around 80-90TWh of annual renewable growth over the next several years, that is equivalent to about 12% of Canada's total consumption from all sources.

Thank you John Diefenbaker.

10 years of mismanagement of this file created a crisis.

Please explain, and provide actual references. What Canadian tax dollars exactly are you talking about?

China invested $103 billion in green energy (mostly solar and wind) last year, that is not only way more than Canada, it is way more than the US, UK, Brazil, and Japan put together. In 2013 their wind & solar generation was equivalent to 25% of all of Canada's power generation from all sources, and I wouldn't be surprised if this year it would be 50% or more. Yes China is highly dependent on coal, currently about 72% of their power comes from coal but that is 10% less than it was a decade ago (81% in 2007). I don't know what you are trying to imply by your wording above. China's total power generation from all sources is about 6.5 times that of Canada. If you mean their total (installed & new) coal generating capacity will be about 10 times that of Canada's total in 4 years then that might be right, or if you mean their total new coal capacity will be 10 times Canada's coal capacity then that might be right. The way your statement reads however is very misleading. b.t.w. China's $103 billion investment in Solar & Wind is over 10 times total investment in all forms from Canada ($8.8 billion).

"offered"? We sold them blankets, in exchange for furs. Have you not heard the term for Hudson's Bay "point" blankets? They were graded on a scale of 1 to 4 points, in half-point increments. A point was worth a beaver pelt, a half-point was a half pelt or an imperfect one. There was the suggestion by Lord Jeffrey Amherst to give smallpox infested blankets to enemy tribes, perhaps that is what you mean by offered.

One subject is all about linguistics, and the other is about idiots ignoring science. I don't 'believe' in the definite article, I accept it as a linguistic construct.

Lots of retired military Generals have already weighed in and stated that Trump is wrong on this matter.

Really, so what do you think our foreign policy should be based on?

https://web.archive.org/web/20160304082825/http://archive.autistics.org/library/AE2000-ToM.html b.t.w., Old English had grammatical gender for all nouns, similar to French or German still do today. That however fell out of use about the 1300's.

We need more first person and second person pronouns to reflect the diversity in third person pronouns.

Discussing off topic folks is off topic, please return to discussing trolling.

Yes, nothing wrong with the President elect writing petty tweets.