Jump to content

Michael Hardner

Senior Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Michael Hardner

  1. dre, I don't need to know for myself - this is an effort to understand how Argus sees things. My belief is that such things are cultural in nature and as such inextricable from surrounding factors. The problem I have with the Muslim=bad crowd (and I'm not talking about Argus here necessarily) is that they can't be pinned down to explain what exactly about Islam that is the problem, yet they're sure that religion IS the problem. They will, at times, point to the texts as the source of the troubles but other times not. If it's the text, then the question about other religions' texts needs to be answered. But if the Muslim=bad people start allowing the problem to be framed as cultural, then they start to realize they're in trouble and they become evasive.
  2. Argus, So then what causes the religion to be violent ? Their books are the same as Christian books, and you contend the people are not the same as Christians. What do you think is the cause then ?
  3. Based on the observation that the mafia causes a lot of violence, I think we need to stop Catholic immigrants from coming to North America, and deport all Italian-Americans and Italian-Canadians (including me) to Italy.
  4. As many of you know, I like to follow Government/Interweb interactions as I believe that our new medium has the potential to break through and improve how Citizens and Governments interact. Have a look at Mike Kujawski's website. Especially this wiki page: http://government20bestpractices.pbworks.com/Canada
  5. Ghost, And this is a good thing. People who post opinions as fact should last as long as a Big Mac in a shark tank.
  6. wulf, Firstly, it's having the "gall" to say, not "gull". Secondly, you have again shown that you shouldn't be on a discussion board because you don't read my explanations. If you read them and didn't understand them you would at least come back with questions. But you haven't done so, and therefore proven your ignorance. Also, please take the time to read your posts before posting, they're very hard to read. Thanks.
  7. Lictor, Depending on what you mean by 'motivated by'. Motivation is one of those terms that can easily have its meaning changed mid-argument, as I'm sure you're aware. The proponents of violence have stated motivations, which may not be in fact the real motivations. Witch burners would tell you they were motivated by a concern over the witch problem. The bible tells you to stone, cut off your hand, force women to marry their rapists and on and on.
  8. Also: Deuteronomy 22 Luckily, I have NEVER discovered my father's skirt.
  9. Lictor, The bible tells you to cut off hands and (I think) penises as well as stoning adulterers and so forth. So ?
  10. We could have done without that mental image...
  11. WB You seemed pretty dismissive before, and now you're saying that your problem is that they didn't follow a scientific method. Well, the studies need to state what their methodology was. If they don't state that, then you should be suspicious. And real world observation is exactly what these studies should be doing, as opposed to newspaper reports for example. But that doesn't address the issue of culture vs religion. What direct experience do you refer to ? Why those schools in particular ?
  12. Argus, 1. Yes, it leads one to believe that. It may even be true but it doesn't really tell us why. 2. Yes, I'm aware but there are other countries and other resources.
  13. MDancer, I got that impression too. Too bad we only get impressions and not answers.
  14. Argus, Evidently it takes a lot of time. We're all bright enough here and we haven't been convinced that a particular religion causes violence yet.
  15. I'd just like to see somebody explain how they predicted it. I'm sure that there was more to it than throwing a dart at a dartboard but it's hard to understand why it was so difficult.
  16. Hi Moonbox While I agree with the gist of your post about civic services for the poor, my 'transit fan' side feels it necessary to nitpick about your assertions on 1909's transit systems. | Sorry, mate: Wikipedia TTC Page
  17. Pliny He cannot reason with the State because the State isn't a person, neither are corporations or companies. Unfortunately posters such as you and bjre have to - for the time being - accept that a 100% pure liberty model of society isn't going to happen anytime soon. If that's to be a basis for calling our society unjust or lacking, then you should direct your efforts at speaking to our philosophies rather than individual policies. As it is, it seems that you would have a large problem with the way all states are being run so complaining about policies is tantamount to complaining about uncomfortable deck chairs on the Titanic. Wikipedia disagrees, but these things are defined differently. Literacy is sometimes defined to include comprehension. That sounds interesting enough. As usually happens when I discuss these things with opponents who have a clear vision as yourself, it seems to come down to getting our society on the same page with regards to the sharing of information. Once that happens, your vision and my vision can compete and evolve. This rejigging of our social information system appears to be the next big challenge, the meeting of which will take us to the next level of general well being, whatever that is. I believe that that event will answer (and dismiss) attendant questions about the role of government, how much/little involvement should there be etc. For the time being, those of us - left and right - who still care about how government works can make use of the tiny tools they have provided us with in order to get answers. Currently - this seems to be the 'contact us' link on government websites. ( See the Health Forum for my email to the Public Health Chief on h1n1. )
  18. WB This is a problem. You believe newspaper stories, but not rigorous academic studies using published scientific methodologies. A study doesn't start out as "being right". It starts out with a hypothesis, and a proposed methodology and it goes through the process. Cute. Proves nothing. Look around you at the human world - it was built thanks to scientists and academics building upon previous knowledge and using the scientific method. You're basically coming out and saying you only believe things that confirm your ideas. You have proven in this post that you're closed-minded. Thankfully, the human world wasn't built by people with your mindset, but by people who adjust their theories based upon objective observations.
  19. bjre, You already started a topic on C51, and it seems to have died at the point where some of us pointed out that you're generally against inspections, i.e. that you would rather allow businesses to operate without inspections, and accept the attendant risks than impose upon them and restrict their rights. That's a value that you hold (freedom over safety) and you're entitled to it, but it's deceptive to paint this as a general infringement of rights. C51 is only a continuation of a set of laws governing safety, which have been developed over long periods of time and are generally acceptable to Canadians.
  20. WB Wow. You actually called anecdotal evidence a 'data point'. As I already indicated these stories prove nothing. But, this story involves the crime syndicates involved in selling and distributing drugs in society so what do you think ? And I already said as much. You're stating over and over again that news stories are a valid way to support a point, they aren't. Having 99 examples of anything proves nothing. There could be 100000 examples out there that aren't in the paper. I think you misunderstood my point. I was trying to show you that the news can't be used as a statistical basis for anything. Rather than understand that, you've come back with some new invented rules for journalism-based statistical proofs. It doesn't work. Go find a real study - an academic study of such things - and let's use that as a starting point for a real discussion. What do you say ? I can even help you find one.
  21. Pliny Aha, so Libertarians use the same mantras as communists, then: it hasn't been tried Ok. To the contrary, I have many complaints. To my mind, the success we've had depended on economic and technological improvements, that were rolled out into a society that was well informed and invested in the idea of a just society. Things are actually better now, though people don't think so. Literacy rates are down ? Maybe but are they down or just fluctuating ? They're at 99 percent in Canada so is this a concern ? Education and health costs are up for individuals, but are they higher for governments ? And what level of education are we speaking of. Health costs are increasing, and wait times are increasing or decreasing depending on whom you speak to. I would say that the public needs to be engaged in managing the government, so as to ensure that performance tracking happens consistently. Violent crime fluctuates as well. I don't think there's a general trend for the worse there. Why have we been successful ? For many reasons, but let's look at our main competition over the last 50 years: the Soviet bloc. They failed because, in my opinion, they had a closed society that was monolithic and unable to adapt. Our society adopted the best parts of socialism while theirs stagnated. What do you think ?
  22. The first deployment of H1N1 vaccines happened this weekend and it didn't go smoothly. There were complaints about lack of communication, there were lineups, and confusion. Today's Toronto Metro included an admission that the Public Health Agency 'couldn't anticipate the number of people interested' in the vaccine. This statement opens the door to the public to ask 'what went wrong'. In fact, it's our duty to ask that question because Canadian Health Services require intensive public participation in order to work properly. To my delight, I found a page within the Public Health Agency web pages (thank you Google) that allow you to email the Contact the Chief Public Health Officer (CPHO). Here it is, and here's my note. http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/contact_cpho-eng.php ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Dr. Jones, I read in the Toronto Metro today that your were quoted as saying the Public Health Agency of Canada couldn't anticipate the number of people who were interested in the H1N1 vaccine. I realize that it may be a little early to assess what went wrong in the planning process, but I have a few questions: On this web page you stated that 50.4 million doses were ordered. As such, why were there lineups early on ? http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/alert-alerte/h1...rg_h1n1-eng.php What was the planning process and how were the estimates you alluded to arrived at ? Is that information publicly available on the web ? Are there plans for any kind of post-mortem on the H1N1 deployment ? Thanks for your consideration. Let's see how well this works:
  23. If taking cut/pastes from the news were a valid way to prove the criminality of a sub-group (which it isn't) then I could present the latest story of Ontario's large mass-murder: Globe Not too many Somali, Iranian or Lebanese (?) names there.
  24. Pliny I don't know... Somalia and Liberia... countries like that seemed to be pretty free of bureaucracy in the recent past... Tying American prosperity to the social safety net, pro or can, probably requires its own thread. The US has relatively lower taxes and less regulation than a lot of the G7 did in the last 1/2 of the 20th century, so.... Crime rates have dropped, general prosperity has increased as has the general well being. Society has done quite well over the past 1/2 century.
  25. No we can't. This is being tried on this thread and the 'welfare' thread, and it just doesn't make sense.
  • Create New...