Thorn

What makes them smarter? The internet? .Few of the young ever read newspapers or news magazines or watch the news on TV. So where are they getting this 'news'? The report could probably have also said that aggressive people make more money but that wouldn't have sounded as sexy. I bet the rude people are aggressive, and that's the real reason they make more money. .My parents partied most nights and definitely every weekend, and they were far from wealthy. Which hurts the elite class? Come now. I thought you said youth were so smart today. All this does is hurt the insurance companies, which then raise their rates to make up for the loss, which then hurts all of us through those higher rates. It certainly doesn't hurt 'the elites'.

And that is?

del

News to you, 'ranks very favorably' does not equal 'one of the best in the world'

As I said, the average fee is $338 an hour, which is an absurd amount of money for a profession which essentially contributes nothing to society. Rather, in whole, they are parasites which drag down the economy with their massive wasteful processes and procedures. And why do you think that would be done, hmm? Except that the drain on money is so great from vastly overpaid lawyers. If there were no medical insurance, do you actually think doctors could charge the massive fees they do now? Not a chance. Nobody could afford them but the very rich, and there aren't enough of them to keep the doctors in business. No, there'd be thousands of doctors sitting around their operating rooms trying to clear out the spider webs, waiting for that once a year person to come along and pay them for an operation. Without medical insurance doctors fees would be a fraction of what they are now. Given the public has essentially no way of assessing which lawyers are good and which aren't, which are honest, and which are frauds (most), and that most operate within a similar over compensated envelope, that's pretty pointless advice. But then, basically all your posts are pretty pointless. What we need to do is redesign the system. Any system which requires you purchase the services of parasites to explain it and fill out the forms at $500 an hour is a completely unjust system. Only a moron would defend such a system.

God, it's like dealing with little boys around here, gleeful when they think they've gotten a rise out of someone. Don't mistake my contempt at your boorish ignorance for being upset.

Done a lot of comparative analyses, have you, of Sweden's justice system, and France's, and Australia's?

I don't hate Americans in general. I just have a certain measure of contempt for some of their failings, and for some of the more boorish among them, like you.

Far more sensible, imo, would be coastal patrol aircraft and fast coastal patrol craft. Right now we have the Kingstons, but no bodies to crew them, and they only do 15 knots. The coast guard is to get 9 midshore patrol vessels in four or five years, which is probably about one third what they actually need. The Auroras we fly on coastal surveillance are over thirty years old and no replacement is in sight for them.

Spend three hours in a line trying to get past the zealots at the American border and come tell me that.

So you're saying Macleans magazine has no ethical or moral values? I love how indicative this is of the mentality of HRCs. Anyone who is ordered before the tribunal, in Wyly's assessment, has no ethical or moral values. Even those where the case is dismissed, where the tribunal itself finds that the complaint was invalid, have no ethical or moral values! The mere accusation is sufficient to deprive you of any ethical or moral values! Guilty! No hearing required.

You're going by hate crime legislation. No, nobody will be charged with using racial slurs, not by the police. But an individual can complain to the HRC over their hurt feelings over almost anything, and then it's up to the 'unbiased' people at HRC's to decide whether or not they will bring the case forward. And they don't base that decision on hate crime legislation.

They haven't even laid charges against the people who turned themselves in yet! It's been two months and not one charge has been laid. Not one. Meanwhile, in the UK, people are already being sentenced and put in jail. And some people say our system is just peachy keen! Canada's Brooken Justice System

We don't need a big, powerful military. We aren't hated by two thirds of the world like you are.

The Chinese are probably reading Obama's email every night and scanning Gates' computer to see if there's anything on it they don't already have. And you can't keep up a military without taxes, and you guys don't want to pay any, so... rowboats it is, with the all volunteer New England militia.

We don't have anyplace to export such people to, but maybe if your lot ever get in control you can establish the gulags and re-education camps which will make your life more harmonious.

He's an American. Anyone who believes in public health care is considered a radical leftist down there.

I am in favour of taxes on the rich being raised, but I don't think it's the same problem here as it is in the US. I do think there are too many tax loopholes, though, and I think mostly the rich can take advantage of those. They should be closed. I don't see how taxes are an issue related to this discussion, however. The issue is the mass of shiftless young men who have nothing to do. Such a crowd will always be trouble. If we're going to pay to support them then we need to get something back from them in the way of an honest day's labour.

The Chinese have one carrier TODAY and their military budget keeps growing by double digits every years. The US has 11 carriers TODAY but that will likely be down to about 5 in five or six years as budget cuts hit. Eventually, if the Republicans win the white house, they'll be down to rowboats as income taxes are slashed again and the US goes into bankruptcy.

I find this entire line of discussion to be silly, frankly. The US navy was principally designed to operate in the North Atlantic, the same as ours. Our navy doesn't go north much, and neither does theirs. But if a cold water ability is seen as important than I'm sure the US has as much, if not more than we do.

She did not mention the problem, which is high lawyers fees, so you are lying. Yes, she commends the lawyers for complaining that the government doesn't pay more for their services, and she calls for insurance (which of course is what raised medical fees to the roof in the US) and mentions others things, but she never mentions fees, which are the heartt of the matter. Not that you've been able to demonstrate that, but it's apparent that your massive arrogance feeds delusions of grandeur which enables you to dismiss, out of hand (and without thought) any argument with which you don't agree. There's that contempt again. You don't care about the way lawyers bill people, and so sneer at anyone who does. I again wonder what your connection is with lawyers. Clearly there's one there, unless this level of antipathy, angry defensiveness and contempt is your normal posting style. You've certainly done nothing to prove that belief wrong.

So because you don't like my position it's a "rant". And by the way, while the CJ mentioned cost and expense she said absolutely NOTHING about the high fees lawyers charge, or the methodology they use, as in billing hours, which was what I said. So you are, of course, entirely wrong. Oh sure, so because I call you on the way you attack me I'm turning on you? There's that victim mentality we see so often from the activist left. Poor you. Are you crying as you write this? Do you feel oppressed?

Yes, it does clash with the Charter of Rights. But it's been fed off of left-wing white guilt over the years, and does its best to stay below the radar of the courts. It counts on people not having the resources to actually hire lawyers to take them on, and when such people or organizations do have such resources the HR commissions usually scurry away. There have been a number of recent, high-profile cases where the commissions attempted to punish people for expressing opinions some felt unflattering towards Muslims, for example, but they've come to nothing. Mind you, the persecution of these organizations and individuals cost them a lot of money, which in itself is a punishment and is used by certain types to suppress free speech. The commissions provide free legal assistance to those who make a complaint against someone, but the accused must provide their own legal assistance, if they can afford it. You can basically sum up the mentality of those who work in such commissions as "If I don't like what you say then you're a bad person and need to be punished". Which, come to think of it, is pretty much the mentality one finds amongst the majority of Leftists and liberals on this site. So you should get more than a few telling you how great the commissions are.

I wonder why it is that there are virtually no liberals on this site who are capable of describing their disagreement with another poster's argument, belief or statement without adding in their derision and hatred for the poster for daring to HAVE such opinions. So you essentially have nothing to say other than that you hold me in contempt for daring to express an opinion critical of the legal profession. Have I got that right? Why is that? I know you're not a lawyer. Lawyers, for all their faults, are capable of putting an argument without resorting to adolescent mockery and derision, and you evidence no such level of maturity or intelligence.

Is anyone else surprised at how quickly people are being arrested by British police and run through the courts? Many people have already been sentenced and are serving time, while in Canada, you know that no one would have been sentenced until at least some time in the spring or summer of next year. That's assuming they ever get arrested. While we've seen images of Brit police busting in doors and dragging out people who had taken part in the riots and stolen property, the RCMP have not yet charged anyone who didn't turn themselves in for the BC riots, or who was arrested at the time. And as far as I know no one has yet been given a sentence of any kind. Why can't our legal system work with the same speed as the British? Although a public opinion favors stern punishment for rioters, a few cases have made headlines and sparked debate. A London man received six months in jail for stealing a case of water worth 3.5 pounds ($5) from a looted supermarket. A Manchester mother of two who did not take part in the riots was sentenced to five months for wearing a pair of looted shorts her roommate had brought home. Late Tuesday, two men in northwestern England were handed stiff jail terms for inciting disorder through social networking sites. Cheshire Police said Jordan Blackshaw, 20, and Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, both received 4-year sentences for using Facebook to “organize and orchestrate” disorder. Men who organized riots on facebook given stiff sentences