Charles Anthony

You have got me there. I agree that we should have drastic monetary reform but not what you suggest. You suggest state-controlled currency. I believe we should ONLY have private banking. I believe that the tax-payer should NOT have to provide any form of insurance to any of the banks. If the banks want to hold fractional reserves, their customers should take that risk themselves.

You may choose to believe so but that is not how it played out. We had speech, violence and the continued threat of violence. Who was right or wrong according to the Proud Law Of The Land was NOT determined. The matter was resolved through an out-of-state-court settlement -- an arbitration -- because it would be cheaper that way. This is approaching anarchy. The door is opening wider. The only injustice is that one side of the dispute has the backing of the state. -- an unfortunate statist problem for which there is not a normal statist answer. Thank you for starting a new thread. That other one is a clutter of nonsense.

Chalk one up for PN008E because he is right on this one. It was from the television show "Different Strokes" and everybody copied poor little Gary Coleman's famous line ad nauseum until it became soooooo common that we forgot its origin.

Hey! You forgot the Smart Ass supporters sitting on the fence and firing pot-shots in all directions!

We have heard the rant. Now I ask: What is the big deal? I despise hearing that tiresome refrain too.

There must be a conspiracy out there. Not really. I think I have found where everything is hidden. This is what I call funny.

No. You would only need a god-like sense of humor as I have. It works every time for me. In that case, I would follow you -- so long as you are not looking to score any circle-A's on the tip of your tongue.

Excellent! I walked right into that one.

Well, you certainly got me there. just to add some salt, I once had a dog but he ran away. Maybe I loved him too much. You do not remember peptic ulcer surgery, do you?

Fine. The last time I tried to explain international trade to an economically uneducated person was frustratingly futile: Yeah, we should put trade barriers to protect our domestic lighting industry from cheap imports of sunlight from the Sun. Sounds like a ingenious way of increasing our wealth! I agree. Many people in Canada are feeling those effects now. A buddy of mine (freelance computer engineer) was told flat-out by a potential international client that a firm in India is offering to do the same job for 1/10th of my buddy's quote. However, the changes are gradual. Thus, I doubt North Americans will have the power reverse it.

Correct and I am skeptical of the diagnosis. Likewise, I have no experience with witchdoctors. Should I give credence to a diganosis of a witchdoctor? Come to think of it, I have no experience with people who claim to be abducted and subject to caudal experimentation by aliens either. Treating a child (except for wards of the state) is exceedingly difficult because the parent makes the decisions. The parent has the right to accept and refuse treatment on behalf of the child. First and foremost, pediatricians and ADD-diagnosticians are providing a service to a parent. They are treating a young-person-who-is-a-result-of-an-adult's-parenting and the service must cater to the parent. An ADD diagnosis is a convenient and easy pill for a parent to swallow. Years ago, we used to treat peptic ulcers by cutting out the stomach. You must remember that. Now, we treat them with common antibiotics. At some point, there was vehement disagreement in the medical community on the diagnosis and treatment of peptic ulcers. Early defenders of the simple antibiotic therapy were fined, had their licenses revoked, denied funding and denied permission to do research. Physicians and the medical community are fallible.

Did they have a government forcing technology upon them? Let me point out how cronyism can be disguised by whoever defines and regulates the credits. Yes. As a simplified example, try to imagine the government saying "We will allow a total of 1,000,000 tons of crap to be spewed out every year!" and every crap-producer will have to buy a license for each unit of crap. Now imagine the government gradually reducing the permissible amount of crap each year. Next year it might be 999,999 tons and the following year 999,998 tons and so on. Each permit will depreciate in how much crap it can spew out. For the sake of simplicity, one credit will first permit 1 ton but next year it will permit 0.999 tons and the following year it will permit 0.998 tons and so on. A company can sell its credits to others. A company that owns 500,000 tons of credits but only needs to spew out 400,000 of crap (because of recently installed scrubbers or green-technology) can sell its credits to a smaller company that does NOT install green-technology. The total amount of crap spewed out is what matters and the government still maintains the control. Here is where the market concentration can come in: the big firm can just hold onto its credits and NOT sell them. I know it sounds paranoidally Marxist but we do live in a crony-capitalist world. No. That would be a bad (for the environment) way to do it. There would be separate crap-credits for different types of crap. Although, throw some money under the table to a politician and you might be able to get the credit rules to be re-defined in your favor.

No, you do not understand free trade. I have already explained it in extremely simplistic terms and you do not get it. I highly recommend taking a high-school introductory economics course to teach the elementary mechanics of supply and demand. Otherwise, you have no hope to understand free trade. If you are lucky, you can find a local school that offers evening continuing education courses. Often, the schools have very lax requirements for people who are taking courses for personal enrichment. Yes, but you should be a little more critical of who you trust and where you look.

I agree with legalizing/decriminalizing prostitution but I disagree with your suggestion of regulating it. We make exceptions in enforcing income taxes. We do not expect yard sales or lemonade stands to pay taxes. Maybe we can leave prostitutes alone too. I am willing to bet that their job is taxing enough in ways non-prostitutes can never imagine. [My disagreement with taxing and regulating prostitution is simplistic and not worth debating in this thread: I do not think any job should be taxed.] Use the REPORT post function and request that the Administrator change the title.

It is better for the uber-poor. We import coffee, sugar and bananas from foreign countries. If we had to produce those things in Canadian greenhouses, they would cost a fortune. The uber-poor would starve but the greenhouse companies would get rich. Now, do you understand? At the risk of driving myself further insane, we import coffee, sugar and bananas from foreign countries. If we had to produce those things in Canadian greenhouses, they would cost a fortune. The uber-poor would starve but the greenhouse companies would get rich. Now, do you understand? The vast majority of everything we consume is imported. Forget about money and think about time. How do you suppose we are able to find the time to produce, let alone afford, everything we consume?????? Now, do you understand? To be fair, Lou Dobbs is in show-business and he has to get ratings. I put him in the same category as professional wrestling. You watch the CBC??? Where does that put YOU? Technically, that is wrong. Free-trade is NOT in the best interests of the protected industries. Unsustainable, yes. Poorly managed, no.

You could have also said "government" too. I find that singling out "corporate culture" to be ironic in an objection to anarchy because "corporate culture" is enhanced and propped up by states and states are enhanced by "big business" which is enhanced by states which are enhanced by "money and power" which are enhanced by states. I have a question for the environmentalist in you. What would you do differently if you owned the entire world? No system can escape it but escaping what people seek is not a problem. Preventing violence is a problem. Anarchy allows poor people a chance to defend themselves against violence. Wrong. Democracy leaves the wealthy with fewer people to buy. Relative to anarchy, there would be less limits in a democracy. Freeloading is a lame excuse for a systemic problem. This is where you continue to go in the wrong direction. The single-brand service is not mandatory. Without state-monopolized tax-funded policing, private services can only be profitable by catering to the masses. That is the beginning of how the poor will over-power the kleptocrats. What?? I am not Dear to you anymore??? What did I do?? What did I do?? I think I am still misunderstanding because the answer seems more than obvious: "will" is not enforced. Likewise, "your desire to listen to pop music" is not enforced. Today, anarchists argue and use persuasion. Coersionists continue to use brute force and obligate people to go to school. With that, people rationalize and adopt theft as a morally acceptable behavior. With your logic, democracy re-brands your feudalism too. In anarchy, the "have nots" will at least have a second-tiered police force and justice system whereas now, they have absolutely nothing. No. Humans will engage in trade before they run to a government for help.

No. I am not in favor of the government enforcing the policy. I object to corporal punishment. Put it this way: I would not let somebody who believes in corporal punishment take care of my kids when I was away. Clearly, BadDog is in agreement with me on that. However, I must commend you on your recommendation. I like that idea! I wish I had thought of it myself! Give my head a shake: kids can not even put there socks away or put on a condom. Why would I trust them with security forces??!!?? No. I was attacking the parents of the ADD child. I have seen several parents who use the excuse that their child has ADD and all of those parents have one thing in common: they do not pay attention to their child. Their careers are more important. The baby-sitting is more important. They are soooooooo concerned about the "early-learning program" at the DAY-CARE center. The junk they buy for their kids is more important. The after-school sports are more important. The skiing trip is more important. The vacation in Disney-land is more important. I believe the ADD diagnosis is an excuse. Not only do they sound extremely exciting but that sort of misplaced pride sounds familiar. Ever since we were born, my parents enjoyed bragging around town about how educated and successful their kids are. My parents are more proud of themselves for having produced successful kids than they are about the success or the education of their kids. If my parents believed hockey was a key to success, they would be violent hockey-parents frantically jumping on the ice with every mis-call and neurotically embarrassing their kids.

No system?? Hmmm.... I seem to recall something that starts with an A and some of us like to put a circle around it.... Wait now, I have it on the tip of my tongue...

For big ticket items, it may work. For most things, it is bureaucratically too difficult to manage. You are overlooking the environment. We can use the environment without having to pay back. That pessimistic perspective is unrealistic. Whoever owns the sidewalks or parks could simply let people enter for free. The maintenance costs could be covered by others. I can walk into a coffee shop and buy one coffee . I can sit and chat all day on my cellphone, monkey on my laptop or read the newspaper. I can walk into a casino and never gamble. Some casinos offer free drinks and finger foods to keep people going. I can walk into a shopping mall and buy nothing. As a hobo, I can sit there all day and enjoy the warmth -- for free. If I need exercise, I can walk laps around the mall all day and all I want -- for free. I can turn on the radio and listen to beautiful pop music and advertizements -- for free. I can stare up in the sky and marvel at the wonderful hot air ballons with advertizements on them -- for free. Free market capitalism does not need to charge everybody for everything. It just needs people to throw down governmental crutches and a different mind-set.

This: does sound Soviet. What is the alternative? Leave it to The Natural Governing Party instead? Seriously, he could just be stalling for more time. The world is not going to end if Harper does not institute a policy right away. If he rushes out, the socialists will attack him again for being an American Republican. He has to say something to the press that sounds acceptable. If the current environmental policy is to do nothing, then he is correct in saying that the policy will not have economic effects.

Stop. Are you suggesting that we should share a common currency? Currently, the American monetary policy is being dictated by the Chinese. We will see a Cino-American economic union long before we ever see a North American union. You should be asking yourself: Is it in China's interest to let the U.S.A. form an economic union with any country other than China???

Forgive me. I was out of line. I was just trying to be funny. Ignore me.

Thankfully! A responsible dog owner! Frighteningly, there are still trainers who advocate the old-fashioned pulling-on-the-leash or punitive techniques. I disagree with your suggestions. 1) extrapolating the canine techniques to child rearing is not wise and 2) there should be no mix, neither for dogs nor for children, but for different reasons. The modern "recognize and immediate reward" strategy works for dogs primarily because of their limited level of intelligence and attention span. For both a "time out" and corporal punishment, the dog's learning will depend exclusively on minimizing the time delay between the targeted behavior (good or bad) and the consequence (reward or punishment). If the time delay is too great, the learning will not happen at best. At worst, the dog will be confused. The dog can only make a cognitive connection if the reward/punishment immediately follows the behavior. If corporal punishment is the consequence, the dog learns to accept and constantly fear confused violence. An aggressive dog is bred. Children are smarter than dogs but not smart enough. Thus, the effect of punishment will be more varied. A child will likely respond to a corporal punishment by learning violence is a means to an end -- not as a consequence to a bad behavior. If the child does not believe the punisher is right, a child will likely respond to a "time out" by getting frustrated and distrustful of authority. If a parent is ever mistaken or if the child is uncertain of the bad behavior, both corporal punishment and "time out" are dangerous. WARNING: The following may sound hokey or green-tea drinking or airy-fairy socialist, but it is true and I am right. The best way of dealing with a child's bad behavior is easier said than done: start early, consistently pay attention to the child (even if you have no idea what they are trying to show you, act like you do) and show them an alternative to the bad behavior. [baby-sitting and day-caring and early-learning and schooling are obvious obstacles. Choose your poison.] Instead of saying "No! Do not .....", one should say "I want you to do this instead of.... because.... etc." Instead of grabbing something from a child's hand, one should offer a different object. Unless the child has the ability to speak, wait until the child willingly puts down the first object and takes the more attractive/interesting second object. [This is certainly not easy to do if you do not know what interests your child.] Unfortunately, starting too late can be an insurmountable task. Not all dysfunctional behaviors can be corrected. You have about a dozen years to create and unleash your own monster. Children eventually develop free-will.

I wonder.... I know where you two can begin: use the PM function.

I know, it was. Now, I have a serious question for you: do you recognize that there are financial limits? We can not pay for ALL possible health care costs. If there was a magical fountain of youth on the planet Mars, should we pay to send every sick person there to recover?