Wilber

There could be extenuating circumstances in some cases but in general, single soldiers don't need it, nor do most single non soldiers.

Pay to who, the deceased? Money for nothing. Death benefits are for dependants, otherwise there is no need for them at all. Pretty easy really.

Any death benefit is provided for the dependents. You can't benefit from something if you are dead. I don't think I am unusual in that I didn't bother with life insurance until I had a family of my own. Probably more the norm than the exception. What is the difference here? Because soldiers would not be able to buy life insurance in the normal fashion to cover them in war zones, perhaps single soldiers should have the option of buying it from the government at normal rates.

It's not blurry at all, you maintain that because there was an alleged miscarriage of justice in this case that drugs should be legalized. It is therefore reasonable to assume that if there is any miscarriage of justice the law concerned should be abolished. Your only reason for originating this topic is not the behavior of the police in this incidence but your own position on drugs.

Are you suggesting that every time the police screw something up, whatever they were investigating should be legalized?

You are right of course and I was somewhat harsh regarding Mr. Dinning. However I have no time for others who would try to get political mileage out of that grief or try to manipulate it for their own ends.

What a despicable thing to say. Really? When you talk about a death benefit, you are referring to the needs of the recipient, not the value of the deceased. My son is a cop and if the worst ever happened to him, I wouldn't be putting a dollar value on his life.

Perhaps it's because a married soldier has dependents. Was Mr. Dinning expecting his son to move back home to be a dependent for the rest of his life? Parents of fire fighters or police officers aren't compensated if their child is killed in the line of duty but their wives and children should be looked after. Methinks Mr. Dinning may be using his son's death to make a political point of his own.

I agree. In general, I think Mercer is quite funny and can be quite insightful. I think he was really off base with those segments. I found them embarrassing and changed channels whenever one came on. They sure didn't make me proud to be a Canadian.

Lets just change the name of everything every twenty years to get rid of old baggage. Perfect. There's bound to be some customs and traditions that you cherish which some people in future generations will think foolish and irrelevant. We'll just periodically brainwash ourselves into believing that they never existed. While were at it, better rename all those places that owe their names to our colonial past like Regina and all those Prince whatevers. Countries like the US and the UK cherish their history and traditions, good and bad, that's one of the things which makes them the great countries they are. Those things are still important because they wouldn't be who they are without them. I don't understand why so many Canadians are always in such a rush to ditch theirs, it's like they are ashamed of them or don't consider themselves to be worthy of their heritage.

Nothing like a good bomb to stop those pesky funeral interuptions.

Supposedly a majority of Canadians think we should negotiate with the Taliban. A majority supposedly think we should be in Darfur. To do what? Negotiate.

Interesting difference in philosophy, those who say something bad may happen therefore we should do something versus those who say something bad may happen therefore we should do nothing. The ability to flip flop between the two depending on the issue seems to be human nature.

What's the matter with that when it is a state that gives aid and comfort to terrorist organizations which carry out attacks on Western countries? Why should it matter if such a state is Islamic?

That's your opinion but something isn't worthless just because you or I might put no value in it. If someone else does, it is not worthless.

Equating transportation with capital punishment is a lot weirder than equating it with health care.

The money taken in for those services is reinvested in providing the service, not put into general revenue to be spent on who knows what. Why not health care? Transportation is at least as essential as health care for our society to function. Without efficient transportation systems our society couldn't generate the wealth required to provide health care

There's the trick. Loopholes make it impossible. No one wants to give up the tax credits. No deductions, just think of the bureaucracy we wouldn't need to administer the tax system. Probably as big a reason it won't happen.

But if your major market is to the south a common currency there might make more sense. Fluctuations in the Canadian and US dollar is a major problem for companies which trade across the border.

That's a silly tactic used by the Federalists. The Europeans have no issue using the same currency at the same rates everywhere in the EU. France and Germany have stronger economies than Spain and Portugal, but it's all the same rate. There is no reason why we can't apply the same principle in Canada between politically seperated provinces. If say the West (Alta, BC) were to be separate from other provinces, I wonder what advantage we would see in a common currency with those provinces when the US is our biggest trading partner. The same probably applies to Ontario and other provinces.

But you have no trouble with taking the money that the economies of those towns provide in order to build your socialist paradise elsewhere.

The Arrow has been beat to death. It was a technical masterpiece but was obsolete before it went into service because the ICBM had replaced the manned bomber as the big strategic threat. The purpose for which it was designed was no longer important enough to justify the expense. The same thing happened to the Concorde, it was only national pride which saw a few of them go into service with government owned airlines and they cost the governments which backed them a fortune. The Americans would likely have canceled the Arrow as well if they had been building it.

Don't blame it on our leaders, business goes where business feels it is welcome. The reality is that the US is our next door neighbour and the biggest market in the world. It's only logical that it should be our biggest trading partner and it is only logical that we would be interested in investing in each other. Stable governments, common language, short transportation routes that are not vulnerable to third parties. We occasionally have our differences but what could be better.

North Americans like their automatics and there is no difference between autos and manuals when it comes to licensing, at least in BC. When I got my license, if you took the test in an auto, that's all you were allowed to drive. Not any more. On the plus side, many of the new 5 and 6 speed automatics are so good there is little if any difference in mileage.

If we would be so much better off, why are we too stupid to do it. I'm sure someone will say it is the American's fault.