Charles Anthony

At whose expense?? Please provide some direction. Do you want to discuss: 1) the dreams of stimulating the economy 2) same sex marriage 3) Quebec nationalism 4) Afghanistan 5) international missions between the fall of 2001 and March 2006 6) Darfur anything else not covered in other threads??

Be reasonable. That is not what I said. I would sit in a parked cruiser in front of his drive-way -- like they do in the movies. By the way, what would YOU do? Is ridiculously kamikaze brutal self-sacrificial force the only thing you can choose? Try to be creative -- at least for the sake of your children who do not need to be orphaned over a stupid drug-bust.

If I was paid to bring that gang member back to the police headquarters, I would use my brain. Anyone with a sense of personal safety and common decency for the possibility of cross-fire victims would surround the alleged criminal and starve him out. There is no excuse for brutal force from the incident described and the proof is in the pudding: the aggressors got shot. This reminds me of that funny television show "Dog The Bounty Hunter" who does not use firearms. He only uses pepper-spray.

That sounds like Canadian style politics. Maybe the Americans are learning from us.Saturn and NormChapeau, would you guys stop super-quoting so much! It hurts the eyes!!

No, not aside from the unethical. Please explain the ethical need for the CRTC.

Makes sense to me. Sure, they can complain but who cares?? Realistically, who cares what the law says??? If I was a cop, I would learn from this example and think twice before taking the liberty of storming into someone else's home. What would YOU do?? Expect everybody to blindly obey brutal force?? If I kicked down YOUR house and yelled "Winnipeg Police!! Obey our command!" what would YOU do???

Hey! I want to be on Kimmy's team! I could also say: "What if the victim was blind (or mentally retarded) and could not see (and hence judge) that his aggressor was incapacitated. What if the victim kept striking out until he heard his that the aggressor was finally motionless -- the only way he could be certain of his own safety." The trouble with that argument is that it can go in circles and circles ad nauseum. [i wonder if that was the purpose of the vague question.] The aggressor is just complaining. On what grounds?On the grounds that nobody needs to hear his complaint or nobody is obligated to act upon his complaint. Hence, my sarcastic "sound of a tree" example.

I do not care. Can you explain: 1) what is wrong with negative billing 2) why we need the CRTC to regulate negative billing ?

Yes. In related news: if a tree falls in the forest, does anybody care?

That is beside the point. I am waiting for an argument that defends the need for the CRTC....

I wonder how much politics was behind this.... enough to be in a Political Forum??

Help me: how did the CRTC help you?? Let me know when it happens. Maybe we can lodge a complaint with the Pencil Manufacturering Marketing Board saying: We did not ask for erasers on the ends of these products!

Why is that a problem?? Everytime I pick up a newspaper or go out for dinner or buy practically anything, I get 99% excess demand. I agree. Keep chopping away.

God forbid anybody should pay for what they get! Forget about prices. We may also see more demand being met. God forbid we should let a market meet demand! Maybe we should regulate the video arcade industry or the pool-hall industry or the dog-walking industry. We certainly would not want to see prices meet demand in any of those markets either. Regulate! Those are essential services!

That might work. However, decriminalizing pot would make more sense.

The market.

Not if every jurisdiction including the U.S.A. legalized pot.

You are too generous. I put these secret g-men on the "bad" shelf. You give the Red Cross a lot of pull. You really think it is that straight forward?? VIOLENCE, ACCIDENTS, POISONING Ed Friedlander, M.D., Pathologist

What do I think? I think you will eventually find a reason to exist on your own.

Put me in the "Yes" column for all of the above.

Why should God answer them?

What exactly do you ask?

Wrong! Only a select elite few are allowed to see the rest of the story.

The private banks are not forcing you to do business with them. When you make a deposit in a bank, you are consenting to a contract under their terms. Several things would happen. Money wears out (paper bills much faster than coin), so currency would become 'scarce'.The lack of actual paper bills is a minor issue. We can write our own I.O.U.s if we had no currency. Hm.... the government really can not give value to our fiat currency. The government can only take away its value by creating more currency and thus debasing the rest of the currency in circulation -- a form of taxation. Interesting. I never really thought of it that way. Lo and behold! What have we here? Adn Kronos InternationalI am sure the farmers care about funding a war. I wonder if the war-mongering businesses will be taxed too -- given that they produce nothing, taxing them would be moot, I suppose. The first impetus of taxation: warring states.

-- because it sells newspapers.