blueblood

That's why those of us with money go down to the states. Take your gripe up with the Canadian Medical Association, their union has a hand in this madness. What's wrong with bringing in for-profit clinics to Canada that pay tax dollars? No it would mean Canadians who could afford to go to the US would be plugging up the system here even more so. It would mean their system is plugged as well. With either system somebody gets left out, either by wait times or by user fees.

Dollars to donuts that hospital was in Brandon. i don't blame him for being upset, for a country that touts the best healthcare in the world and can't help him, but he drives to Bismark and gets cured - he has a point. He must have heard waiting list for a surgery and his wife couldn't drive fast enough!

If your going to use farming analogies, use the right ones. Nothing gets milked out in the pasture. They get milked in the barn. You put the cows out in the pasture so you don't look after them.

Maybe you should get that tinfoil hat readjusted. What a pointless and braindead thread

So people are stupid then? We have juries in trials, are you suggesting we punt them too? I trust the public far more than I trust unaccountable, and nearly unfirable judges.

Here's an idea, you provide proof that MLW posters are incompetant. I know I can prove that you are...

Insane or a party member... Maybe Jintao's got him on a mission.

Define killed. Are the Canadian army lining up civilians and executing them like the chinese do in tibet, or are the civilians in the way of two warring factions and caught in the crossfire? Big difference. All police officers in Canada are armed, however, they will sit and watch protests until the protesters become violent, then they respond with the appropriate levels of force, not shooting random people like in China. However the police will ensure that the protester's right to protest will be ensured no matter how long that protest is. Unlike Tiananmen square where the army is called in and hundreds of people die. All political parties formally apologized for the residential school issue and the students have been compensated by the gov't. Lets see the Chinese do that with the Tibetans and their own citizens who have been through far worse. Great Leap Forward anyone? How many millions of people died under Mao's watch? Dudley George was thought to have been armed, but apparently you don't think police officers have a right to defend themselves. Be that as it may, the police officer was found guilty in a criminal court and has been punished. Were the soldiers in the Tiananmen square riots punished for mowing down protesters? The native people dying since the 1400's is the brits and frenchies problem not ours. I get it, criticize the party, and the Chinese army shoots people. Mao and Stalin thought that shooting "troublemakers" was a correct action that made a peaceful environment too, but apparently in China those people aren't allowed to have opinions. But then again the only thing the Chinese army is good at is killing civilians, western soldiers are too much of a handful for them. You get to come here and are able to spout off nonsense. None of us agree with your nonsense, but all of us agree that you should be able to spout off your nonsense. I can go up to any police officer and call Harper any name under the sun, chances are I will be laughed at. In China if I call Hu Jintao anything other than favorable in front of a chinese police officer, my ass goes off to the gulag. Do you not see the difference? And this is why western powers meddle with commies like you so that more and more people aren't exposed to tyranny. Good thing it worked.

At least you can do a google search on the ohio national guard screw up. Society can say without fear from gov't reprecussions that it was a screw up. Try doing a google search on Tiananmen square protests on google.cn and see what kind of results you get... As for tank man, that is a toss up. --- I think it's safe to say that China is not a free country that allows protests when all sides of the political spectrum on a political forum agree on that. Given what happened in Vietnam, I'll give the western media my confidence in reporting objectively.

Bullshit All right Einstein, you show us a chinese political internet forum, although it would be pretty dry since there is only one party there. The Chinese government is the biggest collection of cowards I have ever seen, when was the last time the Canadian army mowed down protesters? If this poster is the best the Chinese Communist Government has to defend it's malicious actions, then that country is truly pathetic.

People can try to corner a market, but that ends up driving prices which allows new players to come in and try to get a piece of an expanding pie. IMO a monopoly is one company that has 100% of share and has no chance of losing it. The only things I know of that fit that description are crown corporations operating with laws barring the competition. One thing of interest to me is Coca-Cola has no patent. It is a trade secret and I think only 2-3 people actually know the secret recipe at a time. They may have the market cornered, but they certainly don't have a monopoly. Recording Artists have patents and can soak customers based on the fact that they have them, which I don't necessarily agree with. Maple Leaf foods has one of the largest share of the meat market in Canada, however there are lots of little guys in the meat market as well. It takes time and resources to compete against little guys, so Maple leaf lets them have a small share of the market, however if they perceive the little guys as a threat, the hammer comes down. The entrepreneurial process is an amazing thing, just when you think a company is so large and has such dominant market share, someone else comes along with something different and its a whole new ballgame. That's why I don't buy that Rockefeller had a monopoly on the oil market, technically someone else would come in and try and cash in. Another thing to note is that the first diesel engine was powered by peanut oil, which was seen as an alternative to oil. Rockefeller came close to a monopoly, but it just isn't feasible without gov't making it happeen.

Patents expire, and a patent is a gov't tool.

He's retiring and? Inky is the guy who followed marching orders from his constituents other than party brass, and as a result is on the back bench for it. However by listening to his constituents, he does win elections by more than 50% of the vote on a regular basis.

Do you have any idea how the ag industry works?

If the gov't wanted Rockefeller to have a monopoly, they'd simply pass a law similar to how autopac, SGI, MB Hydro, etc. Bill Gates has a virtual monopoly on Operating Systems for Computers, but not a true monopoly.

Odd, there is no mention of centre right gov'ts in Venezuela in the Wiki article. To imply that a military gov't is right wing is flat out ignorant. I'm holding Chavez to the same standard that successful countries are right wing or not. He claims that socialism is the key to prosperity, its not my fault he can't back that up. Ireland has had right wing gov'ts for years, slashed taxes, and cozied up to business in spite of being a wreck. Worked out pretty good for them I'd say. A country floating on oil, that close to the US, with someone claiming that his system will bring his people to prosperity is the catastrophic economic failure here.

I think you have monopolies and oligopolies mixed up. Eventually Rockefeller would be competing against various state owned oil companies from other countries and other oil companies from england. And eventually alternatives. The only way Rockefeller could have a true monopoly in the US is if the gov't legislated it. He is a dominant player otherwise (albeit extremely dominant), there would always be other players entering the energy industry.

What contradictions are there to Waldo sucks at debating? Waldo either sucks at debating or he doesn't. Survey says he sucks. Good old numbers...

In the ag industry, we face a very similar problem with PETA, Greenpeace, and all other sorts of whack jobs. The ag industry used to do what you would do and dismiss them as adolescent personalities; the problem with that is that they convince a few people, then a few more, until suddenly their message is perceived by the public as the right one without because it isn't debated! By standing up to people like that, I can present the audience alternatives and let them see both sides of the story before making up their minds. I'm not out to change his mind, I'm trying to persuade the public. I get just as big as kicks as he does because I can back my claim up with hard facts and he cannot. It's a dirty job, somebody's got to do it.

The government has the power to pass laws stating a monopoly can exist (theirs) in a particular industry. As much dollars as Rockefeller had, he couldn't pull this off, Rockefeller can not pass a law, even though he can gain an extremely large market share. The price of oil would always make it attractive to groups of investors wanting to make a buck off of it, or the exploration of alternatives would occur. Then there are the ineffeciencies of running a company of that size.

Unfortunately what you stated is one of the problems with getting free money. It's the same problem with other crapholes throughout the world, and is a problem on FN reserves in Canada. Hordes and hordes of money being thrown around and nothing of significance happening. The only net help the hatians will get out of this is whatever the people actually going get done. And how long is that going to last, a month? a few weeks? a couple months? The biggest travesty is all that money being raised probly won't do much if anything. That's one of the problems IMO of the left, they think throwing money around will solve problems. Unfortunately it's people that solve problems. If George Clooney wants to help the hatians so bad, instead of asking for money to throw around, he can ask for volunteers to fly to Haiti once its secure and see what actual work can get done.

Is your skull made of granite? Who's side is more convincing, Riverwind or Waldo? Those are the arguments I'm polling. 19 Riverwind 4 Waldo. At least 21 people understood the poll. They knew what it was about, and gave an answer. Hell the comments in the thread specifically commented on your debating skills and "owning" people. I'm satisfied with the results, I'm satisfied with the thread that commented on it, and the comments/results were in line with how I figured the poll/thread would go. I'm not going to change it because you have rocks in your head. The only chain your yanking is your own. The only failure is your arguments, and the results speak for themselves. 19-4.

The sad thing is this country will be a mess after this cleanup. Nice to see you came around to my European food subsidies (dogooders) causing more harm in Africa than good. To sound crass, there's going to be a load of money being burned through going through this.

Given the bashing you continuously get from other posters, your credibility to comment on my intelligence is shot.

You and Riverwind could be debating what kind of cheese is better, what brand of car is better, what hockey team is better, etc. as far as topics go. The point of the poll was who was better at delivering their arguments. You lost, you lost big, and your crying about it. 19 out of 23 people think you suck at debating, those are facts, deal with them. Judging by your posts, you are probably some poli-sci student going for an arts degree. If you can't understand basic reading comprehension, I suggest you go and ask for your tuition money back.