Jerry J. Fortin

I think not. The average citizen just wants to see a return in the form of benefits for their tax dollar. If the truth were known, most citizens would prefer that non tax paying citizens were simply cut off from benefits. I believe that a vast majority of citizens and even those here on this forum would prefer to see the elimination of public benefit for those who do not contribute to the system with tax dollars.

Where did she go?

Kimmy, While I enjoyed your post I think you may be a bit off with the separatist thing. I am out in the boondocks in north central Alberta and can tell you that there are a lot of folks that don't like either the feds or the Alberta Legislature trough hogs. Its time for a change.

How many independent refineries are in your area? I live close to Edmonton and can tell you that these operations are simply part of a bigger picture. Around here the only independents are the drillers and the rest of the service industries providing support and logistics for the big oil companies. The lease owners, the refiners and the retailers are own big company. From the ground to the pump its one big corporate chain. There are some independent retailers with pumps, but that is the extent of it. So the "refiners" are simply part of the corporate operation. They get their oil from wells leased by their own company. They can charge themselves what they want, and they want to charge big, so there you have it.

The coming economic doldrums leave as much potential as they disaster in their wake. From my perspective all I do is buy the stock of my own company on a share purchase plan, and dump what is left of my bank account into the market at the end of the month. The high rollers can have strategies and action plans, I can't afford them and don't really understand them. The stocks I purchase produce dividends that I use to reinvest. That is the sum total of my planning, it isn't much but since I work for a living its really all I choose to do. I have a pension plan that will sustain me when I retire so the investments are merely icing on the cake.

There are bigger fish to fry. Legal weed doesn't even rank as a concern for a vast majority of citizens. The damned government spends far too much time on issues of little relevance to citizens as it is, this effort is of that very nature and it is time for legislators to get their crap together and do something that actually either benefits citizens or solves some problems. It is not as if there are no problems to solve.

Alberta was invaded they day we discovered oil here. Get a grip!

Nobody stole anything. Natives gave away their lands and their culture. Now they want these things back. Ever hear the phrase Indian giver?

That is crap! Those are all your opinions, and those all all in debate before the courts. You need to get off the glue dude. Reality may be scary for you but lets not try to go attempting human flight. Get a grip on reality dude. The nation neither has trillions to give away nor are they likely to forfeit the land titles of citizens to your cause on your say so.

I can't believe that this thread is still alive! Lets solve this once and forever, give the First Nation folks sovereignty on their existing lands and cut them off the tax payers money. Let them govern themselves in the manner they desire, since we seem to be doing such a lousy job of it.

The price of gas is high, but the government could do something about it. Especially here in Alberta with our newly announced surplus. Government can cut its tax load on gas. Now why wouldn't they is another issue altogether. Gas is going to keep going up, and the citizens are going to have to pay for it if they want it, its that simple. The reality is that this single expense cuts into our play time budgets not just our working expenses. It costs us more to do what we want to do. In other words its crimping our style. However, in order for the governments to do anything about it then the shoe would have to be installed on the other foot and it would crimp the governments style. I would suggest that cutting into their play money means more to them than it does to us. It won't happen, taxes are not going away because it cuts into their operating revenues.

Politics will not solve the questions about climate change. Politics will not solve the question of energy prices. In fact politics will not solve anything at all. What will solve the problems we have are actions undertaken by individuals at their own discretion.

Energy prices are going up, period. No amount of government meddling will change that. They will contribute to the increase, bet on it. Consumption is going up, get used to it. Even if it decreases here in the entire western world from Europe to North America, consumption will increase anyway due to the rise of the Asian economy. China and India are in rapid expansion, and that requires energy. If you are looking to point a finger, that is where to point. Alternative energy will not bring the price down but it will ease supply issues and may provide some price stability. The thing to consider is changing the the fuel we use for transportation, that is where you can attack emissions successfully. If we changed over to electrical power from carbon based fuel for internal combustion engines it would make a large difference in our footprint. Vehicle emissions represent a huge portion of our problem. Once again the tree huggers and business types have hijacked the agenda and gotten folks headed down the wrong path.

This entire subject is a sad commentary on the state of politics in Canada. Surely the public will soon realize that the entire notion of a he said she said dispute years ago has little bearing on the state of current affairs in the nation. This garbage is little more than witch hunting at best. There are real problems that the government should be looking into if they had the brains to do so. I guess that pretty much summarizes the level of intelligence in the ranks of MP's in Ottawa. We are faced with rising costs in energy and food production while at the same time we are watching jobs disappear. The health care system is in shambles and our military is involved in armed conflict. Yet we put great stake in the political pot shots being thrown around by partisan spin doctors. This nation needs to grow up.

The problem? What problem? You mean the job losses? The only real problem is the one that prevents an individual from gaining employment. If you lose your job you must find another one. This could involve relocation but it may not. People must support themselves, so they must work. Some folks will lay blame for the loss of employment on the company or the worker but the reality is market conditions, period. Economic reality must set in at some point. Currently we experiencing a loss of jobs in the manufacturing sector. There is some question as to the ability to compete with foreign companies and nations with our own well paid work force. There are nations that have employment opportunities that reflect a much lower standard of living and that is a reality. The size of the labour force in some of these countries makes competition very difficult. Unless we dispense with the concept of free trade there is little that can be done about it. The loss of free trade would result in far higher prices to consumers, so you can understand that the chances of that happening are indeed slim.

You have to keep in mind the First Nations mindset. That is; anybody but them are interlopers who have stolen their land and destroyed their culture. The simple fact is that their culture was incapable of holding onto their "homeland" and they lost it. They are using the system to get it back, piece by piece. Once you recognize that fact then everything else falls into place. They BLAME the white race for their problems, all of them. Unless they seek equality with the rest of the citizens of Canada, the citizens will not support them. They don't seem to understand this simple logic. Too bad for them. Their approach is complicated but fundamentally flawed. I doubt they will ever understand that, but then again it sucks to be them.

So in Canada the natives are not dispossessed, that is indeed good news. So what is it you are going on about then CR? Your entire argument then is that you own the entire nation because you got here first. Bad argument. That concept doesn't hold water my friend. You have to be able to hold onto land in order to lay claim to it. For whatever reason, native Canadians have FAILED to do so. Try reading a history book or something, the entire planet has been overrun at one time or another. To use your logic you should just sign over title to the Africans because they are the genetic forefathers of all of us. Your argument is like that of the Six Nations who came to Canada after the US war of independence, the entire Caledonia issue is a joke. A nomadic people, such as many of the North American natives, never had any real claim to lands other than the we are here so its ours attitude. Borders were never formalized and infighting amongst tribes adjusted limits of territory all of the time. To continue along those lines makes no sense at all. You are far better off now than what you were before the arrival of the Europeans, even if you lost your lands. Besides, isn't it true that individual natives can hold no land? Only the tribes or bands can have claim to the land. Native society is communistic by nature, and we all know the success rate of communism. Grow up for God's sake and recognize the reality of the situation! Natives could achieve a great deal with the right mindset and the right leadership. However the guys snorting pam and gasoline seem to have the market cornered on native logic. You folks should get together with the crack heads from our culture, since there is so much in common there.

The Indian act is indeed garbage, and so is the Royal Proclamation. Consider the stupidity of giving back what was taken by force, at the cost of lives. With all due respect DM the thing to do is think the entire situation through. Keep in mind that laws change at the whim of the governments. Governments change at the whim of the people. Countries are created and destroyed at the whims of the powerful. The real issue here goes far deeper than land claims and treaty rights. What people should consider is the rights and wrongs of the current society, not the past. Does it make sense to second guess every decision ever made by a government? Native land claims need to be resolved, that is true enough. However consider the consequences of the efforts. As it currently stands there are many very upset people on both sides of the street. Would it not make sense to find common ground? Let me say this; if neither side gives an inch in negotiations then what could be gained? Why should one side give in if the other does not? What is the purpose of the effort if not to achieve some beneficial result? Now consider how to achieve the result desired. If the desired outcome is to simply get all the non-natives off land that natives claim to have some hold on, then I would think you will be very disappointed. If the outcome is something else, that needs to be identified and related to the public. The public is the ultimate decision maker in this regard because it can and will remove from governments and positions of power and authority those who threaten the well being of citizens. I am a western independence proponent, specifically Alberta independence. As such I recognize your frustrations with the federal government. I also admire the native tenacity with respect to their own rights. Remember that taking something held for generations is a sour point. What natives are currently asking is for the government to do to itself what was done to natives. That is an act of vendetta and one not likely of success. I would suggest that you folks regroup and consider alternative methods. Given that the current situation is the result of a struggle that is decades long, and the outcome is still far from certain it may be prudent to do something else.

The only dumb ass people posting here are the ones that are not in favour of equality. All citizens must have the same rights, that is the long and the short of it. Government needs to understand that anything less is racist and counter productive. Citizens need to understand that we are all equal, with no more right or entitlement than any other citizen. That is the problem, some people are taking a very childish approach to the current issues. The entire issue of land claims is another matter, but rights are simply rights.

Setting education aside, there is still a common sense factor to address in this issue. With all due respect folks, in the matter of the issue at hand a political science degree would be the only degree worth mentioning, at that one applies only to the means of negotiations and the process of resulting from it. This matter has strong connection to the practical application of politics but does not centre on historical realities. Although the basis of claims need historical documentation as well as current relevance, the harsh reality is that only a political solution will serve as an acceptable resolution. In other words the "win/win" scenario needs to be put forward as the benchmark for proposals. That folks is the heart of a political solution, both side need to think that they achieved something in the process. With that in mind it is my hope that the politicians from both sides rethink their positions. The needs of citizens must take priority over the needs of the state. However, having said that it is not merely the needs of the group in the process of petitioning the government but the citizens that are affected by the process as well. From my viewpoint the only viable solution is one that reduces the cost to citizens levied by the government. In other words, I think that ultimately the government must resolve the issue without further expense to the public. The reason for this is simply that the public is no longer well disposed to government spending on matters that have little benefit to them.

Death is the absence of living. There real question should be ; what does it mean to be alive? I can't stress enough how foolish a statement is that states; that death is an illusion. There is a reality that must be experienced in order to be considered alive by even the most simplistic definition of life in the human sense. Of course it is not merely humans that are alive, even so what kind of life does a single celled organism have? When you add the human factor all considerations change don't they? To return to the point CR, you state that there is 5 billion dollars being spent on only a small segment of society. On that we agree, however I sincerely doubt that the money is well spent. It is spent to benefit a specific race. That is in itself by definition a racist program that ought to be illegal under the law. Government spending should benefit all citizens, period. Forget the grievances and allegations of wrong doing and tell me what you would think of a federal program that took funding from your little native group and gave it to say.... a group of Chinese railroad workers and their families children. That is what the Indian and Northern Affairs department does to the rest of the nation. Lets turn the tables and provide only funding for non-native women of Asian ancestry. How would you feel about that if it reduced the money being spent on the rest of the natives?

I suggest that we simply stop funding the department. However that may cause other problems.

"A bunch of people with no education or real knowledge of the scientific method sitting around arguing about a story does not equate to peer review." Unless the bunch of people is a native band council and the story is about land claims.

The settlers were not diseased, and they were not boat people. They were not alone in their acts of violence now were they? Which tribe started the taking of scalps as proof of murder DM? What you are saying in your posts is overblown and highly slanted, not to mention lacking in certain factual representations. The point is that natives did not originate in North America, had that been the case you could well have a valid case, but you don't. The fact is merely who was here first from your stand point. That doesn't hold water in historical terms. It is the one that keeps the land that can lay claim to it. The point is that for all of your complaining, the real issues with natives are lack of education, drug dependency, family violence, and low standards of living in general. All of these things can be addressed, but that is not what natives want. They want money and they want land. Neither of which will solve the current problems. Such is the short sighted approach you take DM and CR. The reality is that for all the insults you swill they make you look more and more like fools. You folks need to get a grip and join the rest of the world.

Well DM what can I say to your response? You obviously have an agenda, one that seeks to attempt a position of credibility through insults. Not even a nice try DM. Let me respond with this; your arrogance is exceeded only by your ignorance. I could say; enjoy your welfare check from your government paid for hovel while you drink whiskey and beat your wife and children you fool, but I shall not! It is your fate to be forever envious of people who work for a living. Keep it up DM, you give us great and cheap entertainment!