Michael Hardner

Are expenditures lower per capita ? Are there other sources of revenue ? Are there other levels of government collecting taxes, and if so what are their rates and expenditures ?

Yes, they intervene in Casinos too - ensuring that the high rollers get free show tickets.

Pierre can go to Florida where there are many many other Quebecois. Any Canadian can leave, but there's a curve. Raising taxes 10% won't cause 10% of them to leave, I'll bet.

jdobbin - That's what I'm talking about. Reagan didn't tax the rich more, he cut tax rates. To say they're paying a higher percentage of revenue doesn't mean they're paying more.

Thanks for those examples. I'll look at them. The cocaine business is one example where government intervention may be helpful.

I'm all for taxing the rich, storming the castle and so forth but these stats sound bad to me. Why 'forget the tax rates' ? Looking at the percentage of federal revenue from a certain percentage of wage earners seems flawed to me as you're comparing the system in its entirely.

A, You might at least acknowledge that there were some bumps along the way. As I said, I thought that we as a society were past that, but I don't think that anymore. Western Civilization, as it exists now, was designed to learn from its own mistakes. In a very civilized society, we might not need laws at all. As I said, I hear your complaints about these tribunals, but now you're overreaching to call these things star chambers. Care to list some examples of their worst decisions ? Have they ever done anything worse than occupy the headlines, or call attention to the fact that certain people are discriminated against ?

A, Your criticism of Human Rights panels as politically based is understood. But the paradigm of "don't get the government involved if one or two parties are okay with it" is a slippery slope to no code at all.

A, Is that not the case ? Is the quote from more than one person ? I don't care if he finds a single person or a handful of people - it's still a dirty propaganda trick designed to make people distrust all people from that religion. As for your claim that the 'Elders of Zion' was laughable, the Nazis made it required reading so somebody took it seriously. To claim that we're more sophisticated today than we were then is to say you've never read the worst posts on this web board.

A, I was responding to Bills complaint that I passed judgment through out-of-context quotes. This complaint is framed, in the first post, as a flagrant attack against freedom of the press. It seems to me that Steyns comments are possibly in contravention of the law. As such, I think its misleading to say that this complaint is an attack against freedom of the press. It would be the law that restricts freedom of the press in that case. This is a standard trick of propagandists, of course. Quote something offensive from a single member of a group that youre targeting. Kind of like if I took MikeDavids posts and quoted them everywhere as proof of Conservative thought patterns. I guess what we should be talking about is whether hate literature should be banned in Canada or not. In the mid 1990s, I changed my mind and decided that society would be better off if hate literature were allowed. After 2001, I changed my mind again after hearing commentary on American radio that I felt was incendiary.

Those quotes were not out of context. The context is obvious, and the quotes stand alone. There was no need to look hard, nor to have a bias to find examples of the offending material. I dont need to read the book to figure out why the complaint was filed.

Auguste, Thank you for reading my quotes. It's not at all clear that he's referring only to Palestinians living in Palestine. It's arguable, of course, and that's why he phrased it that way. It could also easily arguable that a 'cult' is a religion-based group and therefore he was referring to Muslims in general. I recognize that the Human Rights Commissions are a quasi-judicial and political organization, but they do provide dispute resolution services in these cases. Whether or not you agree with anti-hate legislation, his writing may be prosecutable.

Scriblett, you are bringing new information into this discussion without acknowledging the points I made to you above. This is what's so frustrating about debating with the many of the anti-immigration posters here. They stop talking to you once you bring facts into the picture.

Wild Bill: Who is talking through their hat when you haven't even acknowledged my post on this from before ? No, I didn't read his book. I read a few pages of the excerpt, and posted some pieces above. Read my post, then we'll talk.

Did you read the excerpts I posted ? How can you call these 'facts' and 'demographs' ? Implying a global conspiracy and calling someone's faith a death cult are opinions, smears really. Let's not hear any more whinging about political correctness - this type of hate mongering is something else entirely.

Excellent point, Auguste. Technology continues to make the globe into a smaller place. Some other technologies have been overlooked in some of these discussions: Large container ships. Birth control. Television. Radio.

Thanks for the link, Auguste. Yes, I do think there's a solid basis for a human rights complaint here, and not because it's a sprawling illogical mish mash of anecdotes masking as arguments. Here are some excerpts: This is hate mongering pure and simple, and a continuation of a traditional of racial propaganda literature that started with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion

The linked column doesn't describe what the excerpt said. It's impossible to comment on this in a meaningful way without knowing that.

fcgv, You should turn to the church on these issues, and not your Canada. Canada is a nation of immigrants, and always has been. I have never heard a commercial that says 'Happy Ramadan', and I doubt that you have either. These are things that you make up in your own mind. Your problems are not what they think you are. Your argument and the anti-immigrant arguments that are made on this board boil down to "I don't like immigrants". There's nothing reasonable behind it, just a reluctance to see Canada change. I can understand why you feel that way, but we're not going to be turning back the clock anytime soon, so you should just get used to it.

Yes. There are people on this board who hold some of the same views as MD, who do a much better job of articulating their opinions. Argus, for example post #19 in this thread: AW - yes, I believe it does, here's an article: Canada's high levels of immigration And here are some stats from Statistics Canada: Stats Canada Website

Can you give us a link ? I'm wondering how administrators could have approved risky investments like that. It seems highly unusual to say the least.

In other words feel free to insult Jews whose families have been here since the 19th century. There's nothing Canadian about wishing somebody 'Merry Christmas' versus 'Happy Holidays'. The poster feels that because his family has been here since 1900, he has the right to tell everyone what constitutes being Canadian and what doesn't. I would say that being Canadian means rejecting easy and false pleas to our emotional side. And my family has been here since the 17th century, so I win.

Argus, thank you for your honesty.

They can't agree to disagree.

Riverwind, I appreciate your opinion on this. I think that GW, as an issue, is a symptom of our inability to agree on things. It's getting hotter ! Thanks again,