Charles Anthony

You are not being clear enough. You state that "it can not go on forever" but you do not say why that is the case. You also state that it is "what governments buy" regardless of the method of payment. That sounds like you are pointing out the economic distortions (such as crowding out) created by government spending -- which is a very different problem. I believe in cutting government spending for both reasons. However, not many people can understand economic distortions whether it is due to spending or taxes or monetary policy (or even talking for that matter!).

I feel that if you do not like it, then shut up and separate from Quebec.

I do not get it. What do you mean? Both lose. Consumers get less oil for the same price. Producers sell less oil for the same price. That's why a carbon tax has to be revenue neutral, and revenue neutral by province.What exactly do you mean by revenue neutral? Do you mean the collected tax is returned to where it was collected?

So, drug lords are only fighting drug lords? Drug lords are not fighting anybody else? Who buys from the farmers? Do any of your captives convincingly look like they took part in the World Trade Center demolition? Yes, there is a third, actually thier are plenty, but what kinf of econemy were you expecting from a nation that has been at war for more than 30 years.Spit it out: what are they? You keep posting links to extensively long articles that do not prove your point nor answer any questions. Forgive me, but I do not know how to put this lightly: You did not understand those articles. You are just repeating what they say in them but you do not understand their meaning. I now see why you just post links to articles instead of highlighting relevent text from the articles you selected. That is unfortunate. In other words you get a product and service at a reduced cost, "if you had accepted" and the roofer gets to cheat on taxes owed.Yes and the goods/service traded is roofing. A black market just describes how we trade currency. With my analogy, I am asking you: what goods/services are being traded in Afghanistan? You must be right, thats why Canadian troops are sacraficing themselfs for , to ensure Canada gets it share of the pie. are you really that jaded, or can you prove any of this.I read those articles you posted in their entirety and they have made me more jaded. They do not shed favorable light on the foreign countries that are fighting in Afghanistan. I suggest you read these articles to understand the connection with the demand for oil: They explain an other goal: securing an oil pipeline from the Caspian sea.

Yes. You are missing something. What you are missing is any other production being traded out of Afghanistan. Give me a third one. Give me a reason for why those nations are interested in black market trade. Saying "black market" is foolish and means that you did not understand what you read. We have an underground economy in Canada but it is not a product or a service. A black market is a means of exchange. I get my roof fixed and the roofer says: "If you pay me cash, I will reduce the price." I say: "No, thanks. I want to claim it as a business expense. Please give me a receipt." but the underlying production is the roofing job. Black market does produce anything in and of itself. I ask you this: what underlying interest do countries like Russia, Iran, Pakistan and China have in Afghanistan?????? Those articles say that the only thing in Afghanistan is opium, terrorism and ..... what?? Come to think of it, maybe you have identified precisely what foreign nations want: they want to be brokers in all sorts of black market trade.

Maybe some of that money can be traced back to places we do not want to admit.

I would feel happy and sad (just like with cigarettes). Crack should be decriminalized but not taxed (only because I do not think anything should be taxed). So... does that make me a Liberal or a Conservative??

At the pump. If the purpose of the tax is to discourage the emissions, the tax should be applied only at the last transaction before the gas is burned. If the purpose of the tax is to generate revenue or to nickel-and-dime Canadians or to redistribute wealth or to steal-from-Peter-to-give-to-Paul, apply the tax wherever you want or wherever politics allows.

I believe you hit on a foreign motivation that people are afraid to consider: non-Afghanis may want a piece of the opium action. I read all three of those articles and they come down to two things: opium and source-of-terrorism. Those are the only things they say are traded out of Afghanistan. OK. Answer this: why are so many foreigners interested in Afghanistan??? What national resource does Afghanistan possess that is so commercially interesting??? Are the lands of Afghanistan sooooooooo fertile that all other countries want to breed and cultivate terrorists there? I read that old article too and it also states: If that is true, I would expect foreign interests to collide. It really sounds like a great reason to start an other great world war.

My experience with young Muslims in Canada suggests the same thing too. I have heard from others similar observations. I have never been to France but my sister was born in Paris and my parents left in the 1960's because of overt institutionalized racism. A common insidious impediment that immigrants face comes in the form of post-secondary education: they do not get letters of recommendations the way French students do. I have come across immigrants from France who were there in the 1990's and they say that it was the same. The child of an immigrant in France does not have the same chances at moving up the way he does in Canada. I agree. Maybe therein lies the feature that will keep young Muslim men under control (or help them integrate and balance religious devotion?): the freedom of young Muslim women.

We should narrowly focus a discussion upon such markets. They have been touched upon previously in different threads. There is too much tangential chaff that gets mixed back into the discussions of the environment. Anybody want to revive an old thread or create a new one?

Therefore, everybody is better off if those people do not vote. Is that what you are saying? Please tell me this: why do you defend democracy? Paper ballots can cause just as much controversy.Please explain how paper ballots can cause just as much controversy. No, it can not work if there is no way to verify or confirm the results. Furthermore, the majority of people in the world use personal computers with operating systems that can not even secure its own data. Why are you so trusting of electronic voting??? You are giving people like me more reason to laugh at democracy. I just thought of this great idea on how to combat non-voters: give them something real for which to vote.

Only if it is possible to detach the embryo from the mother and insert it into the father so he can assume the responsibility for bringing it to life. It unacceptable for anyone, including the father, to force a woman to carry a child that she does not want.Is that rhetorical? It is possible for a male to carry a baby to term. The physiology behind it is the same as an ectopic pregnancy where the placenta attaches to the inside of the abdominal cavity. The Science of Male PregnancyIf it becomes possible to trans-plant an embryo and the father offers to do so, does the mother have the right to abortion?

I agree. I do not expect you to give me anything. Are you ready to lift all barriers to trade between provinces and nations?

Let me get this straight. You think that the non-voters are the more demanding people. How do you figure so?

That is not what I am suggesting. I am suggesting that it makes no sense to criminalizing them.

Me too. Those that do vote are generally people who want free-lunches, pie-in-the-sky promises and handouts. They are also usually very gullible. You forgot people who think it is immoral to force or impose their wishes on their fellow man. Would you rather be ruled by people who want to steal your money and tell you how to live your life? Politics caters to people who like to be bossy but do not like to be accountable. Those are the people who get elected and (after you see through all of the smoke and mirrors) those are the platforms that you get. In what country do you live?

Where have you been??? What do you think our politician are doing anyway??? Get ready: I do not think we should fine people for not voting either but I do not think it is realistic to identify voting as doing something good. This thread should be in the Moral & Religious Issues section. It is an easy argument to say that voting is doing something that is bad. Of course, that all depends on what you call good. What do you call good?

Exactly. However, that also sounds like a justification for cancelling equalization payments. What if the province needs more revenue than it can generate?

First, it distresses me when you use the terms "filth on the streets" to describe drug addiction. Are you concerned about these people's health? You do not have to be but I am curious. Second, I have never had anybody grab my legs. If you have, just treat them as you would any other attacker. That issue does not have to focus on drugs. Third, I see drug addiction and laziness everyday. I see poverty too. What do I do? I usually say "No. I have no change." and I continue to walk by. My donation will help more when it goes to the local shelter or soup kitchen or church. I am entitled to my opinion. I am not expecting everybody to do the same. There is no right or wrong. What do I recommend as policy? Cut the spending on drug enforcement of police departments and decriminalize illicit drugs. The money that is saved on these cuts can be directed into rehab, if you care. The reason is simple: use the same policies that are used when drunk people commit crimes or when the mentally ill commit crimes. We permit anti-depressants and alcohol. The only difference is that "friends" of the licensing boards make the money. That has nothing to do with the criminality. Who is protecting them now that can not protect them if illicit drugs are decriminalized? No public policy of criminalized drugs can do that anyway.

Any voter who was swayed by such campaign techniques not only deserves to be duped but is also worse than having not voted at all. I feel for those family-man-image-voters as much as I feel for people who get conned into spending their money on stupid "get rich quick" schemes. Next, they will be looking for chicken in their chicken soup!

I would suggest that the term relevant could also be exchanged with the term irrelevant. I would like to plant the seeds of freedom in people's minds too. However, I object to your Trotsky plan because it is violent. I doubt it. The article does not suggest peace. It recommends violence. I do not trust anybody who advocates violence.

Mmmm, maybe there's more to this than meets the eye.Yes but most people are blind. Here is a solution: 1) stop wasting money on the illegal-illicit-drug-enforcement industry 2) decriminalize all street drugs 3) if you really care, treat drug addiction as a health problem Call me a Liberal or a Conservative or a Lefty McRighty, I do not care.

Thanks for pointing that out. I will venture out and say that there is no practical solution. Are we willing to shoot down unidentifed airborne threats even if they contain innocent passengers? From the ground, we have little choice but to be ready to treat the airplanes as we would treat a dangerous flying animal or as we suppose the Soviets treated a Korean passenger airline in 1983. What should have been done if the rogue airplanes on September 11, 2001 were identified with sufficient time to shoot them down in the air? If we are not willing to shoot them down, we are asking for liberty or security that is physically impossible to provide.

Exactly the way it works in reality. When the company starts losing money, they threaten to close and the government allows them to increase rates back to a acceptable profit level.That's how it works. Holy crow! I had no idea. This gives me more of a clear conscious identifying myself as an anarchist.