H10

If you think anyone from Europe would even want to come to live here, you have never been to Europe. I have lived in Europe, the standard of living is so much higher than ours, in nations like Norway, people pay less taxes, they have better public transit, free education right through university to the ph.d level, generous government grants and benefits even by Canadian standards for people on welfare and who cannot find work, prison in Norway looks like club med, police don't even have to carry guns, and they can take a long weekend vacation to Italy, London, France, Spain, Czech, Hungary, Greece, Portugal, Germany or former Yugoslavia and pay a fraction of the price in alot of these places, as it would cost you to go to Wasaga beach or something like that. You just cannot compare living in a country where someone can take a weekend vacation to sunny italian or greek beaches on a flight faster than it takes many of us to commutte. No one is leaving Europe where a place like Oslo area has more subway stops and train stops than TTC despite having 1/5th the population. Sorry, Canada has a severe political corruption problem which is top down. Do you know what it is like to not wait more than 10 minutes for a bus even in a lonely suburb bus stop and still pay less in fare than Canada when there is 1 foot of snow on the ground? I've come to the conclusion that the main cause of Canada's ills is political corruption and Canadian general greed. Norwegians are smart enough to not buy every made in China good. To move to Canada would be foolish for most upwardly mobile Europeans or even poor ones. You are going to move to a nation where you don't speak the language, you have no connections, you going to struggle to find work, have to pay for things that are free in your country, leave your family, friends, and take on a bunch of expenses for what? It makes no sense.

When white people first came to this country, they were a racial minority by the numbers, the real question is, why do white people keep forcing themselves into countries where they are the numerical minority (Canada, Africa, Australia, Europe, South America, etc) Yes, because Canada's foundation are not racial, if they where, whites would have to go back to central asia while leaving europe because whites were not first here. But since most claims of racism are just made up bs, we have nothing to fear if whites are at the mercy of non-whites, since racism doesn't exist, right? I think you are overthinking it. Whites are already a global numerical minority. If what you said was true, it would already have happened.

It is happening, the quality of teachers has slipped substantial, teachers in the past use to look like ms. mom and where the A+ students who loved school. Now it is full of people with B- and could not get into anything but teacher's college. Alot of these teachers themselves know nothing about racism or are uninterested in the work. I agree with your comment largely. The issue is appropriate guidance, it is not there anymore. In alot of these schools kids have taken the classroom over and there isn't even a real teacher present, you have teacher's sleeping with teen students, and alot of them are female teachers. Fiction in theory could be an effective aid and in practice, often is. The problem is of course, these types of works are always open to interpretation.

This makes sense, she needs the 905 to win a close election, 905 is the deciding vote in most provinicial and federal elections and the pc would be smart to kill her on passing this tolls stuff because it is extremely unpopular in the 905. We pay enough taxes, why should we pay to drive on the roads a 3rd time?

" When the terrorist you're questioning knows the specifics of the next mass murder jetliner attack " 1. Will not work, because terror leaders have learned not to tell anyone but key people the details of the attacks. For instance, many of the 9/11 bombers did not know where, what, how or exactly when they were going to do what they did, they were just told they were on a suicide mission and to do as they were told. This also means that if they get caught, they can not rat out the rest of their team, they also do not even know the names of the people they are carrying out terror attacks with, some of the came from different nations. Historically what has happened was terrorist A would tell his family he is going to bomb point d tomorrow, and then his wife, sister, sibling, uncle, aunt would go rat him out to police to tryto save his life. Thus torture is not useful. 2. Evidence shows that terrorist make up lies under torture to try to stop the torture. What happens when police suspect their is a bomb in new york city, and the terror person caught is tortured and says it is in the brooklyn bridge or city hall, when it is actually on the subway? You see in such a terror situation where attack is imminent, false information from a terror suspect could actually slow down police response time because they are all looking for a bomb in the wrong place! 3. Like any program, this will get used against American civilians. 4. Who gets to designated who is a terrorist in an imminent situation, what are the appeals procedures and safeguards? 5. How far does this torture go, waterboarding, choking, slapping, electro shock to the genetials, toe nail pulling, chinese water torture, rape, sodomization with a stick? 6. What about the international agreements signed against torture? 7. How would you even know if the suspected terrorist knows the specific of the next mass murder attack? Such a scenario seems highly implausible. How could police know that the terrorist is about to attack or has knowledge of the terror attack but yet doesn't have the information to stop the terror attack? And if they do have that information, then why do they need to torture? The whole scenario is fantastical and so unlikely that it need not be considered seriously.

So because Mexico won't pay for the wall, America is going to tax Americans to pay for the wall, then put another tax on imported goods from Mexico that American consumers will have to pay? Sounds like America is paying twice for the wall, HAHAHAHAH. The only way to really make Mexico to pay for it, would be to make mexican nationals crossing the border pay a fee at the border for the wall. If you charge the 1 million mexicans who cross the border every day $100 per crossing, you will get your $17 billion back eventually.

No, they weren't whites, they are Russian Asians. Lightskinned yes, but not in the same racial group as germanic and italic europeans

These were mock resumes, crafted to be similar in style and language. Its not one resume full of errors and the other was perfect, no they controleld for those things.

Trudeau could have blocked the pipeline too though.

I didn't write the article. Canada was built by lots of different groups and many groups came here and were building before the Brits you have not listed.

What "indigenous" folks?

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/immigrants-could-one-third-population-142504136.html Canada's population in changing and fast, and with half of them settling in Toronto, Toronto's population will explode.

That is true, but I could imagine white people countering by pointing out that the Asian natives stole the land from the African-Pacific paleo-Indians. So by that logic, white people stole the land fair and square!

https://www.thestar.com/news/immigration/2017/01/25/better-education-doesnt-help-asian-job-candidates-beat-out-anglos-study.html What do you all think is the reason behind this, is Canada a racist society? I wonder what the difference between different type of Asians and call backs were. It is clear in my view, we need affirmative action laws to correct the biases of the employers.

I was not talking about you. Although, it is very possible that Trump's campaign who was shown to hire 100s of online trolls probably went looking for right lean people to go troll for him online. Trump did not blow up the polling, he won states that were in the margin of error and he got the exact percent the polls predicted. Keystone required further studies, plus Obama was being pressured by environmental lobby, and a bunch of other groups like red indians. He claims millions of people voted illegally, and there is evidence russia tried to interfere with the election, in that case, he might have actually lost the election and won due to illegal Russian hacking or illegal voting. If Obama was not nice, you'd complain, if Obama is nice, you complain, anything Obama did you'd cry about. Obama was president, passed the laws he wanted in his 8 years and was a damn good president. Trump can do alot of things over the next 2 years. However, his executive orders can all be undone 4 years from now or 8 years from now, it is really what can he get through congress and the senate that matters, because those tend to be much much harder to overturn as easily. If he cannot get those 60 votes, he isn't going to be able to effectively dismantle Obamacare and replace it. With reconciliation they can probably put it on hold for 2 years or repeal it to some degree, but of course that can all be erased once dems retake the house and senate. I see the urgency in the Trump side of the country because the nation is trending liberal and progressive on a whole. Trump himself has said if he waited any longer, he wouldn't get elected, and he barely got elected at that. In the last 25 years, only one presidential election has seen the Republican party candidate actually win a majority of the votes, they have lost the majority vote in the last 6 of 7 presidential elections and it gets worse every time. I can't blame Trump for acting as quickly as he did. If I was him, I'd do the same, he recognizes that he is likely to be a 1 term president and his successor is likely to undo most of whatever damage he does to the nation. 3 years from now, Republicans won't have the senate or the house, you are going to have Obamacare restored. Trump's legacy will simply be as a disrupter, who disrupted the long march to progress. Things swing backwards like a pendulum in politics whenever real progress is made, like with Nixon, but the long arch tends to bend towards justice.

No, he declared 6 bankruptcies in one shot back in the 1990s. I didn't even add all the ones that just went plain insolvent or were shut down due to lack of sales. No, I just find it odd. I mean, of all the countries to want to talk about, why would an American give a rats butt about canada enough to join a forum on it, very odd. Also there has been a huge influx of Trump trolls, and paid trump campaign staffers trolling boards everywhere, in every country. It is really obvious they are paid trolls too. You had websites that were traditionally very liberal all of a sudden have 200, 300 conservatives infiltrate it over night all at the same time. I seen it happen on another bilingual board, and it was very obvious because all of the trolls were on the English speaking side, but not a single pro trumper on the other side of the board (the language doesn't appear in google translate, so it would be very tough to translate).

Well isn't that Trump's MO? He has declared 8 bankruptcies.

Why is an American even on a Canadian political website, I find it weird, are these people all trump campaign trolls?

I don't know, but I am not sure if these people are trolls who are paid by the russian government or trump campaign.

Pure PC drivel. Classical conservativism is simply a pc way of saying I'm racist, sexist, homo-hating but too coward to say it openly. conservativism means to conserve and to keep and to hold on to the past. What is the past in these western societies? White christian male patriarchy homo hating and jew killing. Trudeau appointed an original man as immigration minister because he was a lawyer, a refugee and an immigrant, it is you who are too foolish to see it, it was Harper who appointed white males as white tokens to fulfill a pink quota to keep the government looking like snow. But you also states jews should be in groups, but no one else should. Bad memory you have there? Actually it does, because you believe in a special treatment for jews of getting to be in groups where others should just be individuals. This is patently false, because you already said jews should have their own state, where they stick together as a group, this means you feel jews are safer around jews than non-jews, specifically muslims and Christians and other groups. You do not view all people equally when you are saying you need a special country for your entire race, forget safe space, you want a safe country! What are Canadian values? Doesn't Canada recognize foreign polygamist marriages? What about people who are children of citizens or born citizens and don't have to show their face? The problem is not just the curriculum, it is a broader culture of white racism, white supremacy, the inability to lay blame on teachers or principals and administrators or even fire them. You speak about original children as if they are property of pink people. "Pulling them away". They don't want to be around pink people who are racist against them who are pushing them out the schools. You are using loaded words like segregation. Segregation is a forced separation of races in a political system, it has nothing to do with people voluntarily choosing to aggregate themselves. Interestingly enough, you never said the jewish state was segregating from arabs, christians and white people. You said it was necessary to protect jews from being under attack, and jews have their own schools in their jewish state, but if original people want just a school (not an entire state) you then claim it is segregation? jews having an entire country full of schools = not segregation originals having a school = segregation? It is obvious you have a preference toward jews in groups but not other ethics. Isn't it the jews who are accused of israeli apartheid? How do you expect the people you don't want jews to integrate with to respect you when you run from them? You can not force original children into schools of pink people. If they don't want to be around you, there is nothing you can do about it. You want to use original people as a come up, because it doesn't benefit them it benefits YOU, you are being selfish because you just want them around for your benefit. You don't care what benefits them. You are trying to push a failed forced social integrationist policy that doesn't benefit original people and has never worked anywhere with any group. No group of non-white peoples have ever been successfully forceable assimilated in the modern world, from native indians in canada, usa, down to argentina and brazil, to maori in new zealand, and aborignes in australia and a host of other groups across europe and the middle east. Why you would continue to push a known failed policy one could only conclude is that you want the policy to fail. Which is precisely my point, you want to force a failed policy on original people to ensure their failure.

Which comment? There are some conservative democrats like the joe manchin types(usually coming from west virginia and kentucky), who are basically republicans, they vote for trump for an attitude of racism, sexism and bigotry. The only reason they don't vote republican typically is because the republicans traditionally hurt their economic interest ie. Republicans who want to cut government would cut alot of these cops, firemen, etc jobs.

Nah. Trump's lies didn't matter because Republican voters have never cared about lying. They vote for an attitude. Clinton's lies mattered because democratic voters vote based on logic. Clinton bad mouthed African Americans, coal, working class females (bake cookie comment), ignored crucial mid west states and cities and chased a non-existent Republican swing vote who use to vote for democrats when her husband ran. I am talking about the kind of republicans who would cross over and vote for democrats to turn states like Louisiana blue. Those voters no longer exist in large enough numbers to win an election. Why would anyone vote for her when she bad mouth them? There was a reason she was chasing the latino vote in Arizona and Florida, she knew she blew the african american vote so was hoping latinos would save her in florida and arizona. Internal polls were showing she blew the vote with them so she skipped Ohio, Wisconsin and Michigan knowing these states could not be won without their votes. She skipped key cities in Florida she needed. She had a terrible out of touch strategy. Trump was a bad candidate, but Hilary was plain terrible, she rigged the election against Bernie, she could barely win, she was protected by the dnc. It just goes to show, protecting a candidate from attacks in the primaries is a bad idea. DNC told Bernie to go easy on Clinton's on the emails, and it was a big factor in her losing. I'm not saying Bernie would have won for sure either, you never know, but at least they'd not have 30 years of dirt to throw on him.

I know, I was speaking in another country, they thought that mat leave should be paid by the employer.

Every statement neglects some consideration because no series of statement can possible anticipate every possible objection. For instance, your statement neglects that it is possible that polarization may never occur at all or at such a statistically low probability that it may not be worth it, or that it may occur so slowly that another legislator gets added in over time to blunt the tide of polarization. Bicameralism is not necessarily stable through a wide range of political conditions. It is all ultimately arguable. It can be useful to remove extra layers of bureaucracy when everyone is on the same page and the future looks like it clear ahead because bicameralism cannot stop changing demographics or slow them anyways.

It did matter, but it was a comparison, Trump is a far worse liar, Clinton is very bad, many of Trump's vote came from liberal crossovers disgusted with clinton, and much more just stayed home.