ExFlyer

Still do not know why you keep bringing this up. We are not American and the video has no application here in Canada.

I agree. The problem the "underlings" have when it comes to serving the public is they are bound to the existing rules. If issues fall outside the rules, they have no authority (nor responsibility) at all and someone has to decide. The myriad of rules and regulations are so intertwined between departments it is often not just a case of yea or nay from one, it is a case of various departments ensuring none of the rules and regulations are broken. My tenure in the public service has led me to see that the biggest blockage is the rules put in place to be "transparent". While everyone wants transparency, when dealing with the multitude of departments and their requirements and mandates, transparency is not just the department that you are dealing with, it has to be checked to ensure no other department is affected. Of course, when that happens, it always enters on the bottom rung of each department and moves its way up to where the information or permission can be released. "Red Tape" is there because of public intervention. Someone is not happy or pissed at a regulation and forces change only adds to the already full book of rules. For instance, the Supply Manual, the rule book used by government employees when purchasing everything the government needs or uses is more than 5000 pages long and many of the rules within refer to other documents that need to be complied with. The size is as a result of complaints made and every time a complaint is made, and another line is entered to ensure that complaint will not happen again. Having said that, there are many companies that know exactly how to play by the rules and outside of the rules. The latter is why the rules change regularly.

Forgive me for asking but you have used "help Uncle Sam" reference quite a few times and I am at a loss by what you mean. Who is "Uncle Sam" in your rhetoric?

That's funny A dog doesn't care who it screws as long as it gets to screw, private companies follow the same pattern. LOL

Never once said to eliminate cash. I said "society has chosen to use credit and debit cards vice cash. ". Case in point, PetroCan, this past 4 or 5 days has lost tons of business because it's credit and debit capability has been hacked. They could only accept cash and most folks did not have it so, they went somewhere else for their gas. Yes, cash is in circulation but, seems most people use debit or credit.

Don't know what information you are getting but cdnfox has shown information debunking you. Incorrect, I am only reading exactly what you are writing. We (Canada) are not the UN. To be a refugee a person or family has"to meet the definition, a person must be outside their country of origin and have a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion." So, you say, send them somewhere else, as long as it is not to my house?? So, you are hiring immigrants? I used the word discriminate exactly as it is defined in the dictionary. Again with the hiring? Shoot them?? Shoot who? What are you implying here??

I agree with the NHL As a matter of fact, I do not think we should show favouritism by displaying flags or honouring or parading to anyone or any group for anything.

Nothing ...so leave. Last time you voted to leave you lost by a few percentage points. Thing is if the rest of Canada voted, you would have been gone by a huge majority.

I presumed you have a bias by your previous pots on this subject. Adamant that immigration causing economic problems in Canada. So only "some are" ? Your posts so far made it clear that you think all immigrants are. I ask you again, how are you going to determine who to let in??? A refugee that has been bombed out of their homes and life should not be allowed? Only corrupt immigrant millionaires allowed in? How are you going to discriminate? Some Canadians are an economic burden too. As I have said, our native aboriginal peoples, almost in their entirety, have been economically supported by Canada since confrontation. Immigrants are more of benefit to our economy than our own aboriginals.

Ooooo, ya gotta try harder than that. LOL If you have evidence I am wrong, bring it forth, otherwise you just ramble with no proof.

I think we (I) beat this horse to death. Thanks for the talk

Oh, a Harper change to immigration?? So, you agree, "on average immigrants are not a drain." I think the increased influx is pretty well refugee issues as opposed to immigration. Roxham Road allowed 43,000 last year alone.

No ramble at all. The unfortunate thing is the reality hammer keeps missing you LOL Wisdom has always been chasing you but….you have always been faster

So, you are biased enough to say immigrants are an economic burden? We have lost of choice but we are to nice to make people work for what they get. And how are you going to discriminate for entry? Only white? Only English? Only rich? Explain what?? Are truly saying visible minorities and their kids are economic burdens?? Pretty accusatory of you.

1. They are not "borrowing" anything. CTV, CBC< etc pay Meta to have a page. Other stuff is posted by users. I do not know where or why yu seem to think it is Meta thta is posting things. 2. The law passed, by the Senate last week. 3. Meta stands on its own as who is the competition?? 4. I fully understand what "media" is. Media needs to sell itself and it does so by posting on Meta. Media is a "product" for consumer consumption or not. A newspaper sells itself to people.The fact people choose not to subscribe anymore is not the fault of Meta or social media. Same goes for TV news that also posts on Meta. Some newspapers are even behind a paywall so if you want to read it, you have to pay them. If I subscribe to an e edition of the Sun and cut and paste it to Facebook, is it Meta stealing or is it me?

This debate can go on for a long time. In my opinion, to pass a law specifically to make someone pay for something they are not doing is wrong. In this case, for Meta to ban and censure all Canadian news is what a corporation that has a law passed against its operation is justified. Insinuating that Meta is a monopoly is also incorrect. If there were others and Meta is doing something to inhibit them, then yes but, Meta stands on its own. We disagree and so it is

You cannot imply that allowing immigration is the cause of problems. We have home grown and generational "people who cause trouble and don't pull their weight." and have done that and will still do that. I have no evidence or statistic but I believe immigrants are less of an economic drain that our own home grown peoples.

I am not against communication theory. In fact, I am advocating it. We, the people, want free and open communication and object strongly against censorship. Making private industry pay for what the media itself is doing and for what people post is hidden censorship. I am not sure where I am at odds with the big ideas our society is built on. Innovation is generally rewarded...by our and the worlds patent process and, of course by the market. We have choices, read or not, consume or not, go or don't go, buy or don't buy. Government have let he market decide but now, they select where they step in. Is facebooks take on what is on the pages posted by users more important to Canadians than the price of gas being the same at all the pumps? Or that Canada has the most expensive internet/mobile prices in the world? Why not step in to something that actually affects us daily ...or are protecting newspapers more important? Bottom line, Canada does not have an anti monopoly law per say. We have the Competition Bureau that "support and protect Canadians by fostering a competitive and innovative marketplace." and "It is unlawful for competitors to agree or arrange to: Fix, maintain, increase or control prices (including discounts, rebates, allowances, concessions or other advantages) Allocate sales, territories, customers or markets. Fix or control the production or supply of a product". The Facebook issue is not in that category . That is why the government had to pass a new law.

Oh, people like we have now and have had for centuries? Oh, like our aboriginals?

Are you saying that individual posters linking media to Facebook should make facebook pay? Are you saying the news media itself having facebook pages should mean facebook should pay them? I am on facebooks side here. Shut them out completely. Problem solved. Then see who does the whining. Actually, in the end Standard Oil did very well when forced to split. As did AT&T. People decide who they do business with, not government. So, it was not OK for the government to give the media over 1/2 billion dollars but it is OK for facebook to pay media because you, the user and they, the media, use their service?

I cannot buy this "monopoly" argument. especially when society at large is opposed to being told what to do. Your argument is that Facebook is a monopoly therefore government should make them pay for news that the users post as well as the media itself posts. People and businesses have a choice. Post or not. Amazons rise in the marketplace is also a choice consumers have made. To make Bezos and Amazon a demon is being narrow minded. Innovation helps producers get to market, it also helps retailers sell product and, most of all, it helps people/consumers with choices of where to buy their products. Government interference in business is so inconsistent and lackluster it is shameful. Why is it not stepping in with cost of gas? Why is it not stepping in to Bell, which owns most of the tv and broadcast and print media in this country?

Bottom line is that Facebook, twitter, instagram, tiktok etc are all user driven. If they make money because people use them, so be it. Even the news media use their services. Why make a law saying they have to pay the news media that use the same service?? It is like those complaining that Jeff Bezos makes too much money and is too rich.... who made him rich? All the people that bought off Amazon. It is not his fault that people use his service. The new law is hypocritical and I hope facebook etc follow up with their threat to cut off all news. Watch the news media whine then LOL

The wrong people??? Who may they be?

people are a meme?? How is what you post benefiting Facebook? That is you doing what you want to your followers. "Confirm your viewpoint"? You are trying to influence others with your choice of links on facebook., Be they links form someone elses facebook page or form the pertinent we pages. I now laugh at all those that were so pissed the government gave over half a billion to the media and now applauding that the government is throttling social media.

He/She does cause maga will rise LOL