Michael Hardner

1. I don't know more than the rest of you. Otherwise why would I be here, discussing and learning? I do seem to know a bit more about parking on Queen Street. 2. Perhaps this is good advice. Thank you.

Maybe, but we could also amend the Constitution. Listen it was 1980, if you were around, maybe you remember how white and British we were compared to today.

Release the Alienstein files!😂

I mean... it's implied in your scenario that the Brits would have a choice to remove him. Presumably we would also then right ? And I would guess we would be more inclined to remove him. After the last 10 years of instability, I moved back to the pro-monarchy column. I think that as a fallback to runaway populism, it's a sound thing to keep them.

1. Well it could have huge consequences. I'm not saying that it will, but it could. So we should at least get a framework in place to do something in case it gets worse. 2. Percentages of GDP. 3. I think the bulk of the population still sees this as a nice to have. 4. I will put my exchange with paxAmericana on the previous page is evidence. All I want is for people to have a factual exchange of ideas, and arrive at a reasonable conclusion. It drives me crazy that bad science gets floated around. That does happen in both sides of the question.

1. No - it's opinions. The word "good" doesn't exist as a fact. You bristle because I don't want to join in your carnival of logical mistakes. 2. That's not what I heard. 3. Sigh. What did I say you'd do ? Exactly what you did: Come in and defend the West and in addition you need to get all huffy with me, and start throwing insults... It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it - quote attributed to Aristotle So... go read my last post again as to why I won't be trying to educate you on this from a foundation of reason and analysis. You just want to fight about how great you are and puff up your ego. As a result, you're in timeout ... again. Try to enjoy your day despite this post.

These are the seeds for a much deeper discussion, one that we won't be having. Here's an example of what we won't be discussing: You do realize that any fundamentalist religion regards the West as having a degraded view of women ? Including Christian ? People on these very boards, conservatives, decry the decline of our social sphere into hedonism and decadence. I'm sure your first reaction will be to come back to defend the West, but I'm not defending Islam nor criticizing the West. I think that the conversation is just not worth having in this forum. I feel that a blanket and binary moral assessment of an entire culture, philosophy, and approach to living that comprises billions of people over many centuries won't lead anywhere, much less to a conclusion. So, for us at least, it is not worthwhile and wouldn't be enjoyable. Of course, I encourage all people to be proud of their own way of life, but don't try to use that pride as a building block to exploring everything else... is my advice.

I never talked about "how our values dominate the world" because that's neither here nor there. Ok, then, will you admit that everyone believes their values are superior to those of others then ? If we're on the same page with that one then, yes, I believe "our" values are superior, and furthermore that my personal values are superior to others who are like me. That's supposed to be how it works. You see how others behave, you modify your behaviour to differentiate yourself and you go forward. But if you believe the Western way is superior then one thing that differentiates it is the ability to sift through subjective perspectives and arrive at a clearer reality. Another poster pointed out that the West has been a harbinger of science and that's another way of looking at it, arriving at the same conclusion. As such, we can - apart from our own personal feelings and convictions - look at other cultures and see some advantages they have. You have done so here. I don't feel that these boards are best used to beat the drum about how great we are, because that doesn't communicate ideas as much as personal feelings. Remember that facts don't care about those. So I will occasionally point out the Chauvinism of cutting down other cultures occasionally but mostly quietly disagree, and more and more I just avoid such discussions. There are just too many contradictions, and the conversations go nowhere.

I would say the problem is more political, economic, and social. If people were willing to spend the money because they were very worried about the risk I think the world could make an impact. I don't think it's doomsday. The economic reports I have seen, and this is from memory, put the impact and cost in single digit percentages. That would make me lean towards.. I would call it mitigation. But it also means to me that politics has made this a bigger problem on both sides of the issue. Edited to add... My presence on these boards, my Hope for these boards, and my style of criticizing versus making positive claims of my own... They all go to the root of my take on this and everything else: Our public sphere needs to be healthier. We need to have better discussions, so that we can solve our problems.

When it turns to actual costs of choices, it gets complicated. And I doubt that my counterpart is going to quote IPCC economics papers at me so I would be forced to debunk actual economics claims.

I think it's selective thinking to leave out exactly how we got to our place in history as being upwardly mobile, and having our values dominate the world. Ie. Military technology, just as when the Muslims defeated Europe in the middle ages, or when Rome dominated the world. But it's a thread drift anyway....

I get it.

Another poser: The Muslims ruled southern Europe for 800 years or so in the middle ages. What was it about the religions that changed since then... since the assumption is that religion is the cause of prosperity? I would submit that it's military capability, and technology that decides who wins. Good topic though...

I'm going to stop you right there. You were saying our ability to grow to what we are today. Had nothing to do with our, and by that I mean the West, military ability?

Our weapons had nothing to do with it 🤣 It was our Christian kindness that allowed us to conquer First Nations, Africa, Asia etc.

So you're ok with excessive attention to celebrities, just not media celebrities ? Odd but ... ok ...

"I am serious here - if everyone knew about this, many of our modern issues would be resolved." 😆 Very naive. The power of someone like Gates is reflected in an entire group of elites, most of which are smart enough to stay out of the news.

Not sure how many of you on here are old enough to remember the Charles Lindbergh baby kidnapping: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindbergh_kidnapping It was quite a big deal - including the alleged railroading of a German suspect... Bruno Hauptmann

This is a long-time problem and specifically a media problem. Certain crimes "capture the imagination" - I never understood that turn of phrase - and get inordinate attention. Followed by the annual "trial of the century" of course...

Okay. I'm not qualified to lead the discussion.

1. No. Sincere help for another wayward hayseed. 🙂. Why would you think that I would know that the upper level is closed? 2. I didn't deny that. 3. Ok. 4. YOU said thanks but no thanks, so...

Yes, exactly the discussion that I want to have.

Cities have a lot of traffic. I think. New York city put a hefty toll on cars coming on to Manhattan Island. It's not a sign of decline, as much as a sign of growth. Paying taxes and working is capitulation? Would you be proud if I went on welfare? You didn't ask for my help, that I offered it because I'm a nice guy. You're welcome but you're not welcome.

Yes, on their own.

What about if it causes a risk for North Americans though? Do you care then?