jawapunk

I disagree with that sentiment...it is not like there is a draft and people have no choice. Almost every person other than some criminals are there by choice.

I love getting these two days off. I work HR for an American medical instruments manufacturer and get their holidays off. I especially like gettting the extended long weekend. Happy Thanksgiving.

How do you figure a dictatorship? A multi-party dictatorship? Who is the dictator...usually they are the ones who use the armed forces to stay in power...Funny how many changes in government we've had with absoultely no use of force whatsoever. Maybe you mean Canada is an oligarchy, I'm not sure. Do you feel disenfranchised in some way. What about the Canadian constitution as aligned in the constitution and the charter of rights and freedoms do you dislike? Would you NOT ratify these again if you could? I agree we are not in a true democracy, we are in a representative democracy, where we elect officials to enact legislation on our behalfs. Not sure why you are stuck on the Statute of Westminister, maybe you should start your own country because no one here seems to care.

What a load of .... It is really difficult to read your posts, you should take the punctuation advice under consideration.

Speedo is paying that because they know Canadians suck at swimming. We don't win many medals in that sport.

Where the hell is my share?

Kengs. I think the point is even though you make lengthy arguments, you also refuse to back them up with ANYTHING. It is right there in the forum rules, if you are going to make statements that lead to worthwhile debate there is an expectation to back these claims up with empirical evidence, whether it is the quotes from the Bible in this case or survey information, statistical data, entries from a website that is credible, or videos on the subject etc.. If you just say stuff, it is opinion and not fact as you state it. People dismiss you so easily because you are not a scholarly source, otherwise known as an authority, yourself. Even if you were, you wold draw on other peoples work in order to prove your contentions. This is not to say you can't have your own ideas, but again they are then just opinion nles backed up in some way making them credible and logical.

The statute is just saying no law in any dominion, including provinces within those dominins shall be made void by any law passed within Britain's parliament. Meaning they don't hold juridiction over Canada or any Canadian provincial legislatures. I don't see how this is extended to mean no law within the Federal Government does not apply to the provinces. The provinces are sovereign in that they can create provincial laws but only in so far as they don't over turn federal laws enacted nationally as far as a I am aware. For instance even though Albertans do not pay provincial sales tax, they still have to pay GST, and they can't pass legislation to overturn this, only the federal government can. There are always people who want to seperate. There are some here in Newfoundland and probably in evey province in this country. I just can't see it happening. I lived in Calgary for 7 years and I have to say, people are pretty patriotic. You always get your regional loyalties but people care about being Canadians too. I think that is why Alberta is no where near seperation.

I think he means but did not explain, that Canada is going to have an increased senior population which will place enormous pressure on the CPP. I for one, do not expect to reap the rewards of this system when I am old, let alone my child.

I thought we ended this discussion. It is like beating a dead horse now. http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/05/02/geog.test/ CNN fact checks...they wouldn't have posted an article with all the survey results if the results were bogus....or if they did it would be to say the survey was a peice of shite. They do say the survey was a part of a National Geographic campaign, however the data is verifiable. This isn't Fox news afterall

I was reading my Wired magazine on the can and came across an interesting bit of information. The Federal Accountability and Transparency Act. I requires the Feds to build a search engine for citizens to trace public spending. It has alreaddy been passed but only five candidates have made it a campaign pledge to get the ball rolling and have it up in a timely manner. I think this is an excellent idea, really keeps government in check for frivolous spending. I am wondering if Canada has a counterpart as it would be an excellent way to avoid sponsorship scandals and monitor our own federal spending. What do Americans and Canadians think of it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Fundi...ncy_Act_of_2006

Anyways there brother, I have got to sleep, it is late. I'm sure we'll be tangled up in another thread soon enough. Good night

Last time I checked, Bush isn't a party or a company. Maybe I'll get in trouble for posting the survey about American knwoledge of the world though as it is insulting to a nationality. haha

Whatever you say there guy. You know all the inner workings of National Geographic. I'm sure that by bascially calling fellow Americans geographically illiterate the they got a ton of new subscriptions! If you are anything to go by, I don't think Americans would take kindly to it. You seem like it was a personal attack. Not sure what the effect was...People basically stopped posting here since you and I got in the argument that has nothing to do with Bush for the most part. If you are implying that people stopped posting because Americans were excluded to some extent, I think you're wrong. I think pretty much no one wanted to get involved in the back and forth you and I have had for 40 odd posts.

I just read the rules. I'm pretty sure I can call George Bush a jackass. Especially since this thread asked what my opinion is of him and his presidency. Now if I called you ca jackass, then I can see that as being a problem.

Actually he will fade from my mind as soon as he steps down like he wasn't even there. I just enjoy how much Americans get pissed off when you talk about their politics. And it is National Geogrpahic you are right. But they are still reponsible for jounalistic integrity and I'm pretty sure they haven't gained notoriety and their reputation by publishing shit. Your argument once again, is weakass.

If it is so irrelevant why are you arguing tooth an nail then if I call hiim a total jackass and pretty much a pawn for people with absolutely no regard for international security? If it doesn't matter you can simly ignore me. In the end it doesn't matter that George Bush was the worst president in the history of your country, who accomplshed the least, derailed many constitutional protections and has drove record surpluses into even greater record deficits and national debt. I mean who cares if I say that right?

Actually based on the survey results , because this report is concerned with the Americans interviewed. They interviewed people in other countries. I couldn't find the final result per country, just the States. Maybe you can I don't know. The survey esults were that you are right alot didn't fare well, but that the United States was second last before Mexico. That is a little harsh about the Jay Leno surveys....come on man. You are seriously equating this survey with that shit? don't get me wrong but they obviously cut everyone out who gets the right answers. If I believed that crap I would think all Americans are borderline retarded. You're right I don't get to vote, but I have a brain and can have an opinion. I guess it is the same for you having so many opinions about Canadian politics yourself which are totally irrelevent.

I can agree to that Jefferiah. In fact I usually am pretty much to each their own. But on forums where your opinion is pretty much front and central, things can get pretty heated you have to admit. I am in another argument that started abot Bush's presidency that has gone so far off topic that we were arguing about the American school system and then when I introduced a survey conducted by National Geographic he dismissed it and then we have been since arguing over statistics. Things get too carried away. But for my part I will allow that people can believe that homosexuality is a sin and immoral. I may not agree with it and I do want to understand the mindset because Christianity, to me is based on love. not only a love of your neighbour and friends but your enemies and those that would do ill to you. That's why I don't understand the judegment being passed constantly and the comments, especially by kengs like "you know where you are going" etc etc. I pretty much want to say, you aren't Jesus, you aren't God, who gave you the right to pass judgement or ostracize people from worshipping Jesus Christ. This isn't directed at anyone in particular just when someone says stuff like that.

Regardless we are so off topic now it is ridiculous. The tpic was supposed to talk about Bush's presidency. By your name it sound slike you are happy with what has been accomplished. I disagree. End of that argument. hehe

Must I remind you, it is not my "asinine" contention. It is based on a survvey conducted by National Geographic.

That was not the point of the damn survey. I'm pretty well sure the people who are in Afghanistan as well as their families know where they are, which would place them IF SURVEYED within the population who CAN find it on a map. The fact is in a random samle of 18-24 year old Americans more can't than can. Of course we know the total population size, but since the entire populaton cannot be surveyed that is what statistical inferences are used for. They are based on mathematical principles. If you know as much as you say you do about statistics then this should be obvious. And approximately 600 people is more than enough to make those inferences with a 95% degree of confidence.

Seems like you need a refresher course then guy. And if you don't and use statistics ona daily basis you shoudl have no trouble doing a simple hypothesis test on the survey data. You know the survey size, the population proportions based on yes or no answers.

Actually it states in the back there was one refusal. Now as to sample sizes. If we take one answer that 63% cannot find Iraq or Saudi Arabia on a map and If we want 95% confidence with errors of +/- 0.05 (%) that is 5%. Pretty standard error. Z= 1.96 at 95% confidence and sample size is n = (1.96)^2 (0.63)(0.37) / (0.05)^2 = 0.8955 / 0.0025 =358.2 or 359 people surveyed. Well within the bounds of this survey. Ummm I did read the survey, the methodology, the results, and the highlights as it were. Still waiting for a mathematical dismissal because it looks to me like this survey is completly legitimate. I think your refusal to admit anything is amusing but also kind of pathetic. As to your question, I can find pretty much anything on a map, it would be hard to test me over the damn internet forum however.

I don't know where you studied statistics but the sample size is more than adequate. When we do not know the population standard deviation a t* statisitc can be used to make statements about the population mean. The only assumption required is that the sample is drawn from the population which is normally distributed. If the standard deviation was known the Z* test statistic can be used and still the population is still large enough. I'm not sure how you can dismiss any of the findings as you don't have the information necessary. However if you can mathematically dispute the findings in a hypothesis test please do, and post them. I'll take it to my stats professor tomorrow and see what we can do with it. However if you are just making more crap statements you can stop now. Not sure but since Alaska is part of North America isn't it then included in a continental United States? I can see how Hawaii wouldn't be.