Canuckistani

You're jaundiced. You have yet to hear that he wasn't doing those things either. At night I have front and rear lights and bright clothing. I still had a guy on a sidestreet come all the way over to the left and nearly run headon over me until the last minute, just as I was getting ready to take a dive over the curb. If riders don't take preventative measures, the part of the responsibility lies on them if they get hit, but even when they do, as you can see, they still get hit.

They don't. We're better educated and healthier. What the US has is a much more effective management culture: more willing to take risks, more willing to innovate, and more competitive. I guess more willing to grind workers wages down too. As Drummond points out, many Canadian companies are content to remain small, even tho small companies are less productive.

There we go. It's not really about medical reasons at all, is it. Should be allow parents to brand their children if their particular religion demands it. What about all the facial and body scarring that some tribes in Africa engage in. This is a barbaric practice that has passed its time

I think it's coming. The movement to ban it seems to be getting stronger every day.

Thanks for that. I just read it in the newspapers when the discussion was all about how to spend the stimulus money. Another good reason is that it requires no ramping up and no separate distribution system - ie it can be put into play tomorrow. And be scaled back quickly if things improve. I think spending money on re/training is also very well spent.

I have no problem with it being performed for valid medical reasons ie ones that require an intervention now not because of some future supposed catastrophe. I would bet the number of infants that require a circumcision for immediate medial reasons is exceedingly small.

Anybody under 18 is an infant?

Most important to my mind is educating drivers that cyclists have a right to be on the road, and that they need to be taken into consideration. That means no swinging doors open in the path of a cyclist - that's why we ride a doors width away from parked cars, which gets the drivers foaming because they feel we're not over to the right far enough. It means not passing a cyclist and then immediately pulling a right in front of them. It means passing a cyclist with at least 1m distance between you. (In Australia this is the law and should be here too). It means not parking in bike lanes. It means signalling your turns. It means not pulling out of parking lots or alleys right in front of an approaching cyclist. It means not running stop signs when the cyclist has the right of way. (Yes, drivers run stop signs too) Etc etc.

The tests are way too involved for me. But I know that I'm biased against Muslims and against Arabs, Muslims or not. I try to guard against acting on those biases tho. I have Muslim acquaintances with whom I get along very well and who I think are great people. I'm just biased against Muslims as a group.

That's what ban it means - ban if for children under 18. You can do what you want with your body after that. I can't think of one pressing medical reason it should be done to an infant.

my understanding is that a hoodectomy can be done for the same medical reasons as circumcision - cleanliness and the problems that arise from lack of same. We live in a 1st world country. There is no reason that an uncircumcised man needs to worry about cleanliness if he's been taught how to keep himself clean. There are also horror stories about circumcisions gone wrong, including the Winnipeg man who they tried to raise as a girl - didn't work and he finally committed suicide. Doctors seem to agree that the medical benefits from circumcision aren't worth the risk and suffering of the infant. We don't ban it because we want to be pc. It's mutilation for no good reason, and should be banned in a secular society.

Actually, raising EI payouts is a very good way to stimulate the economy. Return is 1.6 times investment. People on EI don't hoard money, they spend it for expenses. Same with other means of boosting low income. Business isn't going to ramp up in the face of no demand, even if taxes are 0. While you are right that we can only stimulate so long, it's also true we can austerisize ourselves right into the ground. The trick if finding the right balance, and knowing where and when to spend and where and when to cut. I would say no govt gets this right, each cuts where they see not getting any votes anyway, and spends on its cronies. This means the poor are always sucking hind tit, since unfortunately they don't vote. We need a rabble rouser who will change that.

Actually clitoral hood removal is very similar to foreskin removal. The former is done by adult women to enhance sexual pleasure or for medical reason as well. Should that be allowed to be performed on female infants. I think it's time to ban this practice for children under 18.

Absolutely, that is one type of bike rider. Pedal three strokes and then cruise. Nothing wrong with that. Unfortunately planners often see only those riders, not those who are commuting and want to get from A to B as quickly as possible, or who are riding for exercise and want a good workout. They get neglected, and need consideration too. The problem with bike paths is that then drivers expect riders to be on them, or the govt even legislates that they do so. It just doesn't work. Look at the killing of the triathletes in Quebec recently. Some guy ran into and over what, 5 of them riding on the road, and the comment was that they should have been on the adjacent, dirt, bike path. Come on.

Just mention a person you think is totally unbiased. You must have formed your opinion on this somehow. Or are you just saying theoretically there could be an unbiased person in the world? Nobody would disagree with you there, I guess. Personally I think our evolutionary heritage biases us towards being biased. I believe there are studies that show babies being biased toward the language of their mother, for instance. The intelligent person at least recognizes that and tries to compensate.

First sentence - good one. Second sentence, that's a fallacy. You're making a claim just as much as they are. But the burden of proof on you is a lot less onerous than on them. The people saying there's no unbiased person in the world are going by their experience of never having met one. If you have met one, you should produce them, otherwise the sample so far would weigh against your argument.

Sounds terrible. Peds and cyclists don't mix. Especially cyclists who actually want to get from A to B or are athletic. The speed difference is just too great. Cyclists ideally would have their own paths, but from what I see in Vancouver, that is almost never the case, and paths are poorly maintained and not sufficient. Cyclists need to be on the roads so they can go at a decent speed and take the shortest distance to where they are trying to go.

Then all you have to do is produce one person who holds no biases at all, and your point is proven.

Looks like for our businesses the time is never right to invest in productivity. The low dollar and immigratin wage depression allowed them to get away with not investing in new equipment, just hire cheap labor and make a profit anyway. Since they haven't modernized, they won't be able to go like gangbusters when if there's a genuine recovery. I've been hearing about lack of Canadian productivity since the '80's. And that the Canadian worker is more productive than the American worker, all things being equal, but that Canadian management lags so far behind its American counterpart.

Some good points being made here, interesting discussion. We're born to be biased because it saves our bacon in threatening situations, so we have to guard against it because it can actually create a threat where there was none. Education and discussions such as this one are the way to do that. Some multiculturalism is also good here, but overdone it can cause it's own problems - creating ethnic enclaves for instance and people not mingling with others. It's one reason I think our massive immigration has been too much, because we get enough people of a specific group who then clump together instead of feeling any pressure to assimilate. Of course that's a bias right there, because as people rightfully point out, their kids often do mix and assimilate. OTOH, other times they don't.

Often someone's biases will push you into being more biased yourself. I'm not for any political party, tho I skew left on many issues. But if someone is rabidly CPC, where they can do no wrong, I guess I could fall into being rabidly anti-CPC, evne tho there are things I actually agree with them on - to a point.

I think using the term Israeli Apartheid (referring to Palestine) is valid political comment. I also personally have said that Isreal seems to be following a policy of Lebensraum. Both of those are easily labelled as antisemitic, but I disagree. The Israelis aren't Nazis, but they are emulating a specific policy of Nazism, and for the same reason - our Volk deserves it. What's happening in the West Bank isn't the same as South African apartheid, but again, there are similarities. All this is different than if the protesters were chanting "kill the Jews" or such. But, I think Gay Pride is shooting itself in the foot by allowing these people to march. Didn't know Gay Pride was about politics. They should just make it about gay acceptance. They should also keep out the exhibitionists who just want to shock people - that's no way to get acceptance. There's lots of gays that are against that bullshit too, and realize it just makes them seem like drama queens. (The dykes too)

Everybody is biased. Often there aren't facts available in these types discussions, often only opinions dressed up as facts. Or facts that have more than one equally valid interpretation. This ain't rocket science. The trick is to recognize your biases and at least try to maintain an open mind. For instance I'm against the high levels of immigration we currently have. I don't think either side has proven that they are a positive or a negative. I think we should try to cut back and see how that works out, others think the status quo is just dandy, and some think we should double immigration. No way to really prove with is the correct path, and each path can have more than one branch.

the only reference to anti-semitism I could find in your link is: I think the people that use that term have a point - it may not be exactly the same as South African apartheid, but the Israeli state certainly seems to be creating Palestinian enclaves within Palestine with their settlement policy. I think the greater Israel movement is as racist as the Palestinians who want to drive Israelis into the sea. Neither side can claim the moral high ground, IMO.

What are some examples of the slogans they shout? Many people consider them to be anti-semitic because they use the term Israeli Apartheid. But them many people say any criticism of Israel is anti-semitic. Apparently a good proportion of these QAIA people are Jews. So are they being anti Jewish or anti Israel policies?