blackbird

I know there was a huge amount of unacceptable abuse that went on in residential schools and I don't agree with children having been taken from their families by force, but some claims about the schools stretch credibility. Was the goal to "eradicate native culture" or was it to teach natives how to live in a society which is 95% non-native and speaks English / French and give them a basic education? The present day reserve system has proven to be an unmitigated disaster. School dropouts, widespread domestic abuse, alcoholism, drug addiction, no jobs on reserves, and general despair and suicide. How's that working for them?

Somebody just pointed out to me in an Email that I am not allowed to post the complete article in a link, but can only post the link. I apologize for posting the article. It looks like somebody has removed the article from the debate. I noticed somebody has posted a video introduction screen. Wonder if that is allowed. It is more than a link. There is also a button to drag files here to attach. and another button to insert other media. If I have a file on my computer that I downloaded from the internet, and I attach it, wouldn't that amount to the same thing as copying an article from another website? Here is my link. The Top Ten Reasons Climate Change is a Hoax: www.globalclimatescam.com/opinion/top-ten-reasons-climate-change-is-a-hoax/

Oh... OK, so your opinion is the only reality we should accept. I need to change my thinking...

I watched this video, but I don't agree with it. It has the look of propaganda. Probably made or contracted to be made by the B.C. government. There are many claims in it that are completely illogical, like somehow putting a carbon tax on some people is going to be fair. Also, the claim that carbon tax reduces consumption. I have heard that to be false. People who use natural gas furnaces are not going to turn the temperature down as someone suggested and put on more clothes. Canada is a cold climate with much of the country having long winters and low termperatures. It is hyprocrisy for some people in cities to tell other people they should turn their temperatures down and put on more clothes. It is unhealthy to live in house that is not properly heated. Ignorant comment. The whole video and carbon pricing is built on the premise that man-made climate change is a fact, when in fact it is only an unproven theory. Check out the website Ten Reason why man-made climate change is a hoax. http://www.globalclimatescam.com/opinion/top-ten-reasons-climate-change-is-a-hoax/

It punishes those who happened to own homes with a natural gas or oil furnace at the time this carbon tax was started eight years ago. It would cost about ten thousands dollars to replace an older regular natural gas furnace with a new high-efficiency natural gas furnace. Why should some people be punished while everybody else gets off free? Also people who live in remote areas and must drive a lot, maybe pickup trucks, must pay more carbon taxes on their vehicle fuel. The thing is this carbon tax makes absolutely no difference to climate change. Even if one accepts that carbon emissions effects climate change, which is unlikely, Canada only emits 1.9% of the worlds' man-made carbon emissions;. B.C. a tiny fraction of 1.9%. Why do you think it is fair to hammer a small percentage of B.C. residents with this tax while the rest of the world pays nothing? Seems totally unfair and a scam. The people that brought the tax in, like former Premier Gordon Campbell, skipped off to the UK to take a job as a diplomat. He is loaded with money as are other cabinet members who brought the tax in and put it on people like me who live on a pension. Thanks for that. It does nothing for the enviironment. One big forest fire or volcanic erruption probably emits more CO2 than all the natural gas furnaces running a full year in B.C.

I agree with most of what you said. Except the income tax cut did not compensate the people who paid the bulk of the carbon taxes. That is a government deception. Must go out for a few hours.

So you think people that live in homes that are heated by natural gas or oil furnaces in communities where that is the most common way of heating should abandon their homes or spend thousands of dollars? Natural gas is known to be an extremely efficient form of heating and causes almost no air pollution. It is a vast resource in the ground that creates thousands of jobs for Canadians. We also sell huge amounts of natural gas to the U.S. Billions of dollars in tax revenue for government pays for health care, education, etc.

If you believe that, I have a piece of real estate and a lot of other things to sell you. As a senior, I paid over $2000 in direct carbon taxes in the last eight years in northwest B .C. on natural gas heating and auto gas. The B.C. government claimed they gave a tax reduction to offset it as part of the so-called revenue neutral carbon tax. Nobody seriously believes that. The fact is only certain citizens paid the most carbon taxes while the rest of the population paid little or no carbon taxes. People that did not use natural gas or oil heating paid no carbon taxes on that. People with electric heating or wood stoves (which are air polluting) pay no carbon taxes. People who live in apartment buildings and ride transit buses or skytrain pay almost no carbon taxes. So it is a very discriminatory tax Most of the rest of the world pays no carbon tax while some of us in B.C. have been used as the scapegoats in the great battle against climate change. It is an unfair and discriminatory tax grab. The slight reduction in income tax that might have been given was spread around to everyone in the province and would amount to a tiny fraction of what some of us paid in carbon taxes. Therefore while some of us paid thousands of dollars in carbon taxes in the last eight years, that money was taken and given to mostly everyone else. Hardly revenue neutral, which is phony political rhetoric.

Agree with emission regulations to reduce air pollution, which is a major problem in many cities. The focus of Trudeau to put a price on carbon is a whole different issue. That will not affect air pollution, but it is a misguided attempt to reduce CO2. Unfortunately carbon dioxide has become the bogey man that many fear because of the fear mongering about the fiction of man-made global warming. Many do not understand that carbon dioxide is an essential part of life on earth. It is necessary for plants, forests, and vegetation to breath. It is also absorbed by oceans and performs a natural function in the equilibrium of the natural order of life on earth. Huge amounts of carbon dioxide are released by volcanoes and forest fires every year. Many scientists dispute the claims of the man-made global warming theorists.

You are being contrary for the sake of being contrary which is being a contrarian!

Ah, guess you let the cat out of the bag. You hoped to keep it a secret. LOL

Climate change has always occurred throughout history and don't believe that man has the power stop it. We can adapt to any negative effects of changing climate. The idea that man can control the climate is not credible.

I'm not sure what you mean by mitigation. We should be prepared and adapt to climate change. Putting a price on carbon and imposing carbon taxes on people will only hurt the economy and increase the cost of living and chase investment and jobs away while doing nothing to stop climate change. So people are not only being affected by climate change and must adapt, but they are being hit by government taxes and regulations on the energy industry.

I am opposed to carbon taxes of any kind. I am not convinced man-made global warming is anything more than fiction. Leftist politicians and governments love it because it gives them an excuse to tax us. In the last eight years in B.C. I paid over two thousands dollars in direct carbon taxes and more on the indirect increase in the price of everything. We are one of the few places in the world that pay any carbon taxes. Most people on the planet pay nothing. In fact only a select few in B.C. pay significant carbon taxes. There is a 7% carbon tax on natural gas heating and auto gas. So those living in apartments and riding rapid transit pay almost nothing. Those who heat their homes with electricity or wood stoves pay no carbon taxes. There was a small tax cut but that applied to everyone so it was spread around to all taxpayers. Those who paid little or no carbon taxes got the rebate, while those who paid most of the carbon taxes got the same small tax break. Canada as a whole only emits about 1.9% of the world's CO2 emissions and B.C. a tiny fraction of that. Carbon taxes in B.C. have done nothing to curb global warming which always has been a natural phenomena. It is just a scam and tax grab.

Lots of good comments. The U.S. always has been a tough negotiator on things like the lumber agreements. Canada and/or the U.S. have gone to the arbitrator on the lumber agreements. So I don't expect anything to change on that. I don't think we will see any major changes to NAFTA because it is a good deal for both countries as it is. There may be some slight tinkering. Canada has top negotiators ready. We have years of experience at it. Shouldn't be any big problems. I don't think Pence or any top officials will be involved themselves. They probably don't know much about it. It will be done by specialists in negotiating NAFTA.

My guess is that travellers from Saudi Arabia are not considered a possible threat to the U.S. and the country is considered an ally on the war against terrorism, and/or Saudi Arabia has a vetting system they trust.

"Rather than succumb to these apocalyptic “chicken little” cries of “#MuslimBan,” forcing our attention away from the real problem of Islamic extremism, I gently urge Muslims—and other well-intentioned folks—to take this unique opportunity of a new presidency to directly challenge the ideology of Islamic extremism, directing our outrage at the real enemy, the ideologues that promote Islamic extremism, defeating them and saving lives everywhere, so that we actually ban something very nefarious from this world: the ideology of Islamic extremism."-- Asra Q. Nomani (@AsraNomani) is a former Wall Street Journal reporter and the author of Standing Alone: An American Woman’s Struggle for the Soul of Islam. She is a cofounder of the Muslim Reform Movement

If you believe that, there is not much we can say.

i never said any citizens of Iran in the U.S. are involved in terrorist activities. The problem is not with those who are in the U.S. The travel ban is not for them.

Iran is considered a country very hostile to the U.S. and Israel. They are reportedly a state-sponsor of terrorism.

An immigrant from Somalia did attack about 13 people with a knife sometime in the past year or so in one of the northern U.S. states. Fortunately nobody died. One reason I heard for putting the six countries on the ban list is because they have administrations which are unwilling or unable to properly vet travellers. Some governments in these countries are in a state of anarchy or hostile to the U.S. Trump also receives confidential security information from national security agencies that he cannot make public for national security reasons. He may have specific information which indicates there are genuine terrorist threats from groups in some of these countries.

You are completely out of touch with reality. Check the website religionofpeace dot com Jihad report for March 4 to 10th, 2017. Attacks 30 killed 309 injured 228 suicide blasts 3 countries 12 Total number killed by terrorist attacks since 9-11: 30,446 I would guess a lot of these victims are Muslims.

What lie or slander did I say? Disagreement and pointing out facts is not a lie or slander. You might not like it or disagree with it but it is a point of view. A lie is something meant to deceive. Sorry if I offended you. If you want to put be on your ignore list, you are free to do that.

Don't know if I am on the ignore list or not. She threatened to put me on it if I continue asking a question she didn't like. So I gave up. Do you know what OP means?

There have been other religious groups that make demands too, such as having the public swimming pool have men only swimming at certain times, changing the menus in public institutions, removing certain foods from the menu, special prayer room in a university, use of a gymnasium in a public school on Fridays to use as a mosque, special prayer breaks on the job, not accepting a female as a teacher or authority over them, etc. etc. Should these kinds of demands be accommodated? Some would say yes, others no. Is this creeping Sharia?