Visionseeker

Geoffrey, I cannot share your enthusiam. The CPPIB's ten tear average rate of return is 4.8%. Now that might seem satisfactory on the surface, but the point behind creating the CPPIB was to increase yield so that the fund would be better positioned to withstand the baby boomer run. Surplus contributions were to be invested at rates of return exceeding secure bond markets (which averaged 3.1% over the same period). Things looked good two years ago when the annual average was 9.4%, but something went terribly wrong in the last two years. The CPPIB team lost sight of its mandate and began to chase the market rather than buckle down existent gains. Yes, their losses were "better" than most. But they still exceeded the expectations of their mandate. They could've easily delivered a 6.8 to 7% ten year average with a proper plan. But they've never actually had a plan and so potential bonuses governed their investment moves. The bonuses being paid are basically a reward for returning 1.7% more than the bond market would've supplied. That's pretty lame if you ask me.

Je suis bien familier avec la langue de Voltaire mon petit con. Tu parles de ta matrise de plusieurs langues mais ton père n'a pu s'acharné à la voix de ses proches. Pourquoi? Peut-être il y avait un parti de ton père qui disait "What do I need this for, I already speak white." I don't have the time or inclination to school you on the notion of speaking white and its implications around the globe. Nor do I have the time to spell out how language is indemic to culture and that any measure that would marginalize a language is an assult on those who speak it and a warning to sign for others who don't. What I do have time for is to point out that you speak without facts and don't have a clue what you are talking about. How much do we stand to save from junking LINC? Come on, give us the numbers.

What the!?! Generation X is most certainly not Tory-town. The bulk of Tory support comes from males over 50 and females over 60. Oh, and almost every second person in Alberta. Pierre is a headline grabing twit. Most Gen Xers who care to notice see him for what he is: empty.

Right. First, public service language training is given to essential staff that lack appropriate second language skill to retain or advance from their current position. These are the applicants or employees who won competitions for, or occupy bilingual positions in spite of their unilingual skills. There are very few of these and their training costs the treasury no more than $40 million a year. Second, the LINC program is largely revenue neutral as the $490 Right of Permanent Residence Fee is a cost recovery vehicle for adaptation services. In short, drop LINC and you have to drop the fee. Essentially, it's a service immigrants pay for. Canada accepts over 225,000 immigrants each year and LINC costs $275 million. You do the math. How much of the $490 Right of Permanent Residence Fee can be seen to cover LINC. But your proposal that Canada go to the UN and demand that everyone speak white is the most disconcerting aspect of your post. I mean really, how is our global standing enhanced by demanding that the UN drop all these other nonsense languages and just use English? - and from a bilingual country no less. CIDA does not, to my knowledge, fund language training programs. But they do support education programs. Are you suggesting that they should fund only education programs provided in English? All told, your austerity measures would probably save no more the $200 million dollars while stunting the professional development of public servants, cheating immigrants, alienating hosts of other countries and depriving hundreds of thousands of children of an education to satisfy your anglophile bigotry. A colleague of mine once asked rhetorically "what is the price of stupidity?" Should he ever ask me again, I will confidently offer $40 million as the figure.

Me thinks your tin foil hat be on too tight this morn.

The Government of Canada has been taking steps to address service provision to non-official language communities. Those steps have necessarily been limited to outreach activities, but represent significant overtures nontheless. That the critical mass of French-Canadians reside in the province of Quebec should not lead us to believe that bilingualism is a Quebec thing. Bilingualism isn't about provinces, it's about the individual right to speak to your national ancestral government in your own language. French has been a fact in what we call Canada since the 1600s. While English made its appearence in the late 1700s, it wasn't until the mid-1800s that English out numbered the French in the group of colonies. In the ensuing 100 years, the English majority tired many tactics to extinguish the French fact. All of these attempts failed. Then, some started to say "If we can't beat them, then lets ask them to join us" and lo and behold, bilingualism was born.

Hum, have you ever considered that the suicide and incarceration rates of CAS wards stems from the damage they suffered before CAS intervened? I have seen how the system failed to undo such harm and wept. But I have also seen as many cases where such failure seemed assured, yet they succeeded. They aren't without fault, but CASs are to be applauded for their efforts.

Wow! What a terribly unepathetic, anglo-centred view of the policy. Official bilingualism is a policy that ensure that 1 in 4 Canadians can speak to their government in their own language. No more, no less. If by political motivations you mean that the state has pandered to a substantial minority by virtue of committing to speak to it and allowing it to speak back, then I say guilty. But how is this a crime? What is unconscionable about this? I won't hazard to guess why most Canadians support it. But I'm glad they do. For it speaks to the basic civility that is the Canadian experience.

Limbo champ or just an ass? You decide.

So purge the current crowd in a year, then let the provinces determine (by vote or otherwise) who will replace them with asymetrical terms from one province to another being a given. This isn't starting well. So PEI has as much influence on matters as Ontario! A 40 to 1 dissenfranchisement would be a hard sell don't ya think? Interesting. But define social programs please. Why?! How owuld this be beneficial to the military and, more importantly, to our national security? And ye shall devise a military platapus that the world will envy. Somehow I doubt that provincial premiers would want to participate in this erosion of their present power. Some measure of Senate reform is possible without changing the Constitution. But if the Senate absolutely needs changes, wouldn't be better to put everything on the table in order to get it right? The PM and Cabinet already get such counsel from the civil service. It's just too bad PMs and Cabinet ministers have a strong tendancy to ignore the wise counsel of the public's servants. But thank you Jerry. I truly appreciate your attempt to forge a cogent plan for Senate reform. Maybe if more people shared their thoughts in this manner they might come to convince me that their plan just might work.

Great editing job, for you conveniently omitted this important morsel: Therein, lies the basis of the notion that biligualism is the essence of Canada: it is a testimony to our civility. A virtue for which I have no doubt you struggle with daily.

I imagine he came to that opinion because you cited that no good CBC as your source.

If this case was simply a matter of taking away kids because their parents are racist, it would most certainly raise some interesting ethical questions. But it is my understanding that the state's case here has more to do with issues surrounding neglect and profound mental abuse. For instance, testimony has alleged that the daughter has been functionally abandoned on at least two prolonged occasions (i.e. months). The toddler son has spent entire days wearing the same soiled diaper and exhibits serious communication deficiencies for a child his age. In one year, the daughter missed more than a month worth of school because the parents were sleeping in to recover from drug and drink binges. Even the maternal grandmother had serious concerns about the children’s circumstances. Grandmother of kids in Manitoba custody dispute says they were living in squalor The media sensationalizing of the racism angle is a manifestation of their need to titillate in order to draw readers/viewers. But the real story here is one that is unfortunately altogether too common: a fragile woman's need for conjugal affection has outstripped her capacity or want to satisfy the needs of her children. That, my friends, represents the bulk of the caseloads for social service agencies across this country. Sure, the "I hate certain people so much I believe they should be denied life let alone any constitutional rights" types are now pathetically crying "my rights! my rights!" in this case as a new cause celebre. But it’s not about them now is it? It's about two kids with extremely messed-up parents.

Um, it's not the GDP ratio that should concern us. It's the unbelievable rise with no apparent justification (i.e. stemming unemployment, massive investment, and so on). This was a government that was promising not to go into deficit only 5 months ago. Now we have a HUGE deficit and what do they have to show for it? Yup, nothing. Harper and co. are simply ideologically ill-equipped to properly see us through these times.

How big of you to respect us commoners being as we are. It's too bad that you look down upon us though.

It's about time. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/200...rwash-park.html Way to go Ontario. Now let the healing begin.

Nice hijack. You know very well that one (public pensions) must have nothing to do with the other (public expenditures).

Your argument either contradicts itself or your are arguing from a quasi-democratic state. To be a republic, a president must be chosen. Yet you allow for a nominated head as voted by oligarchy (with Quebec having the first among lessers rights). A federal state cannot stand on a communitarian compromise.

If only he could remember where he put it.

You're reaching. If you think for a moment that the Senate is somehow a wedge issue in our present economic circumstances, well... Let me know how that works for ya after our summer election.

Actually, smallc might be on to something here. A senator could be appointed by the PM for 8 years and then, when the term ends, the House of Commons could vote to extend the term for 4 years if an all party committee asks for the House's pleasure to do so. This would certainly add some incentive for senators to act as disciplined statesmen during their terms - forcing them to reach across the aisle from time to time to foster good relations. It’s a far cry from an elected Senate. But I need to see what powers an elected Senate might yield before I can even support the notion.

After presiding over a year which saw $17 billion in losses to the public pension fund: CPP bosses to receive millions in bonuses Nice to know that bonuses still get paid when three years of gains are wiped out. Some will defend this troop by saying that their losses weren't as bad as the market overall and I'll agree, they were worse. First, the losses reported ignore the $7 billion in contributions the fund received during the year - so the real loss was $24 billion - almost a quarter of the fund's present worth; second, this wasn't play money that drives much of the market's activity, this was a retirement account that needs to be growth oriented without excessive risk. Falling a few percentage points below the losses of a speculating market is not what the mandate requires. And as to this notion that the bonuses are necessary to attract the best talent, I offer you this: If you needed an effective military, would you get it by buying the best general money could buy; or would you get it by investing in the lower ranks and draw you leadership talent from that exercise? Man I'm sick and tired of this drawing talent argument. You don't draw talent, you draw has-beens. Talent is gathered by nurture and development and, as the investment bears fruit, all involved appreciate the results. When did we all stop recognizing this?

Canada has always been, and always will be a multicultural country. The French, English and Scots joined in founding our country at the expense of or with various First Nations communities. The Irish built the Rideau Canal. Scandinavians and Ukrainians helped to settle the west. European Jews and Greeks, Italians and Poles infused our cities with their talents and the Chinese gave much blood to build our railways. We are a nation of immigrants. And for that reason, we are strong. Canada has no “defined culture” because it is forever being redefined. Just as the Main in Montreal gave us Richler, Layton and Cohen, it shall soon give us a Chen, Yoo or Nugyen. And I eagerly await the results.

Try the Swiss Swiss languages

Nail, Head, BANG! One of my father's patients collapsed in a fainting episode. He told everyone in the waiting room with an appointment to come back in the evening (he later tended to them until 2 am) and advised all walk-ins to go to emerg or to come back the next morning. But the day that a walk-in collapsed in his office is a story still told in that town today. He had two people in the waiting room help carry the young man onto an exam table while the receptionist called for an ambulance. An employee from the dinner across the street came in and explained that the "boy" acted strange right after he'd received his order. My dad turned to the employee and asked: "Where's my sandwich?"[a lobster salad sandwich he had delivered every tuesday] The employee muttered with surprise and a little disgust, "at the dinner!" "Did you handle my order as well as his?" my father asked. "Yes." Answered the employee. That cinched it for dad. This was a case of anaphylaxis and after the airway failed to clear following the administration of ephedrine, he performed a trach and the kid survived. That's old school. And that's what medicine is missing today.