jennie

Pay attention to the polls: the last one I saw said the Greens are drawing disaffected Tories, who are not as 'fundamentalist' and dogmatic as Harper, and they don't like his co-opting their responsibilities to their constituents. It looks to me too, see edits above - that the CTF is co-opting Green tax policy ideas too. This isn't an original Green idea, though, it is being discussed internationally as well.

-edits- http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/b...2445afa&p=1 The Greens are increasingly small-business owners and engineers, fewer and fewer of what Green leader Frank de Jong himself jokingly calls "nuts, fruits and flakes." (He hit the Citizen's boardroom last Friday.) De Jong admits he started out as one of them, a music teacher drawn to the party of tree-hugging and year-round sandal-wearing. But he's learned the hard way that people like that, however committed, don't win elections. They've been joined, though, by castoffs and renegades from other parties -- disaffected Tories, mostly, but Liberals and New Democrats, too, who want to make more fundamental changes in the province than those parties advocate. De Jong speaks convincingly about how government policy encourages a polluting industrial culture. The natural resources we own in common (like clean air and fresh water and, thanks to a quirk of history, most mineral wealth) are practically free for the taking by anyone who can use them, even though they're finite. But with our tax policies, we charge people to be productive -- we tax personal income and corporate profits and impose sales taxes when somebody makes something we want to buy. De Jong describes this as privatizing public wealth and socializing private wealth, and says it drives people and companies to be wasteful with resources and stingy with labour. As it happens, this is very nearly the same problem the industry-friendly C.D. Howe Institute complained about in a report on tax policy just last week. The institute sees it as a tax-efficiency problem, not an environmental problem, but the solution is the same: cut taxes on production, the institute says, and raise them on consumption and pollution. The reason I say the Greens are small c conservative is I know they are attracting more of the rural vote, the salt of the earth Canadians who are fiscally conservative, generally church going, and dedicated to the conservation of the land. The Greens are not a 'lefty' movement, though they have attracted some who thought so. But no ... they are very pragmatic, down to earth problem-solvers who want industry, the economy and the human environment all to flourish, and they are not (yet?) dogmatic about their approach but open to innovation.

I totally agree, kgs, and I think a new approach will alert people to pay attention, get involved in thinking again. The possibility of expanding the number of viewpoints in the legislature may appeal to some disenchanted voters ... the 40% WHO DON'T VOTE would be nice, many of whom are the youth who feel the system is too rigid and static to interest them may be attracted to the possibility of youth voices. I would love to see a youth party!

That documentation is not all public yet as it is part of current negotiations.

A comment copied from your link: This is probably *not* a myth. See the refs to Jeffrey Amherst and other smallpox > >related episodes in the following H-West exchange from 1995: > >http://www.h-net.msu.edu/~west/threads/disc-smallpox.html > > > >Doug Deal > >History/SUNY Oswego So the jury's still out.

A 95% extermination rate doesn't lie. Granted it may be higher south of the border than north. Disease decimated all Indigenous Peoples, and the remains of many Iroquoian peoples like the Neutrals and 'Hurons' came together, many with the Five Nations of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, some by choice and some by conquest. There were battles against Jesuits and churches and 'converted' aboriginal people as the churches' land grabs had already begun and the traditional Iroquoian people objected strongly to loss of territory. There are two sides to every story, and we have been taught only the Euro slanted and perhaps incomplete account.

Can you provide evidence of these two types of events?

Why?

Another report said there were about 15 Six Nations youth on the site. Perhaps Joe reported that, and it got misconstrued. Likely some confusion there. Who knows how rumours grow ... or perhaps he did imply that. His account of his own observations is very unclear. In fact he reports only what the nephews saw. It is weird. That is not the key point, though it relates to the issue of the veracity of Joe's account ... did he and nephews leave his brother Sam alone while "more than three individuals" attacked him ? ? ? ? That is the issue. WHAT DID JOE SEE THAT HE IS NOT TELLING? As it turned out there was first a 15 year old, apparently pinned to the wall by Sam, and then two 18 year olds to rescue the younger brother. (If you were Joe you'd be yelling to the nephews to go get weapons, and wading in yourself to help your brother, now against three, but Joe reports nothing of the kind. Weird.) And btw in our society "Youth" programs, such as the Native Youth Movement and Youth Challenge International, etc. etc. include ages 14 or 16-25 (secondary-postsecondary). Technically, though, the 18 year olds are also legally adults ... "men".

http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1093893563 Kind of off the topic of blankets, but it is interesting that the US seems to have no difficulty calling what it did "genocide" as this museum will attest to.

http://www.bcgeu.bc.ca/Aboriginal_Rights/A...l_dates_history The practice of payment in blankets: # 1850 - James Douglas makes 14 land purchases from Aboriginal peoples. The Douglas treaties cover 576 square kilometers of land on Vancouver Island. Aboriginal people are paid in blankets and promised the right to hunt on unsettled lands and allowed to carry on fishing. A policy is established to allow no more than 10 acres of land per Aboriginal family – settlers are allowed 320 acres. # 1858 - Mainland BC is declared a colony of Britain # 1859 - New Westminster becomes the first capital of BC. # 1862 - Smallpox kills one of every three Aboriginal people. # 1864 - Joseph Trutch is appointed commissioner of land and work.Trutch denies Aboriginal title and prohibits rights of pre-emption of Aboriginal people and adjusts the size of reserve land. http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/culture/arts/ss_boyer-en.asp Although Boyer has worked in several styles, he is best known for his "Blanket Statements". These politically charged paintings are a subtle form of anti-colonial criticism: during the XVIIth century, European settlers distributed blankets infected with smallpox to Aboriginal people in order to contaminate and exterminate them.

You may be right but the article also interviews older 20 somethings. Darn, the link is locked now, but here is a bit more info... The Boston Globe Magazine article: The New Me Generation calls the newest crop of graduates entering the workforce narcissistic and entitled. While it may be difficult to work with them, the article proposes they may have just the kind of attitude that can't be replaced with outsourcing... In this regard, narcissism poses quite a conundrum. On the one hand, we need plenty of young entrepreneurs who are willing to believe in themselves in the face of skepticism from their peers, mentors, and society at large. But we also need these upstarts to be correct in their beliefs. It does a society no good to invest in young narcissists who, in betting on themselves, squander resources as they come up with wrong answers again and again. The key, it would seem, is to identify the upstarts with the most potential and then – despite whatever personal qualms we may have with them – allow them to run with their ideas. 1 Comments: * At 8:10 PM, September 30, 2007, Single Ma said… I don't know if this is the opinion of a "New Generation" or simply ANY graduating class. For some reason, I clearly remember similar articles when I was graduating college years ago. There are many interns in my office and I don't have a problem working with any of them. It's usually the older people who resist change that cause the most problems. When will people just accept the fact that many college grads are outgoing, sharp, and have a lot to offer. Despite what the gray haired execs think, the youngins bring a fresh perspective to the boardroom. I would have to agree that it is the older workers not the younger that are resistant to change. However, young enthusiasm is quickly extinguished when the SLOW speed of change becomes apparent to them.

I am really not sure how I will vote, and I seldom decide before the election is called. I am a bit surprised that more conservatives are not embracing the small-c conservative Greens, though perhaps it is an urban group of conservatives on here. I know the rural small c's are shifting their allegiance as they are unhappy with Harper muzzling their democratically elected representatives, and they are concerned about urban sprawl on their greenfields.

your credibility IS hereby challenged.

We are talking about the filthy rich who likely inherited their wealth. I have nothing against those who work hard for it.

That was the point of the argument I read: According to the incubation period, the infection was not normal person-to-person transmission. Explain why pigs as 'vectors' would result in infection all at once.

ScottSA your credibility in this thread challenged, as you have not provided evidence to support this statement that the treaties have been settled. This is a gross error of fact, imo, and I think you'd better clarify for the readers.

That was ¨Posit's statement. No I don't know and I would not assume so. I think the answer is number 2. I can't find the original statement by Joe. However here's one .... The man’s brother, Joe, told CHCH-TV that more than three individuals attacked Gualtieri and that his nephew saw a native protester hitting him over the head with what may have been an oak railing. I think Joe's story under oath will be interesting.

I watched my daughter's generation confront life's realities, of harassment and 'imperfect' workplaces. I have seen these younger ones in action too, and they don't give way. I am interested in perspectives of others here on whether there is a noticeably more open, innovative quality to workplaces today. The New Me Generation The crop of talented recent graduates coming into today's workforce is widely seen as narcissistic and entitled. And those are their best qualities. By Jake Halpern | September 30, 2007 Nicole Mirabile, who is just 15 years old, has a clear vision of her future, and it doesn't involve a boss. The prospect of working at a Fortune 500 company – and landing the sort of well-paying job that Americans once regarded as the benchmark of success – holds zero allure for her. "It would be hard compromising with a lot of different people whom I might clash with," she speculates. Mirabile, a sophomore at North Quincy High School, would be far happier running her own company. "I have the time, I have the brains, I have the patience to do it, and I am not going to give up if I fail once," she vows. . . . http://www.boston.com/news/education/highe..._me_generation/

You have the right to appeal. Those are dangerous offenses.

Prove there isn't! It wasn't me who said '15' anyway, but I remember reading it somewhere as I keep up with the news.

I don't disagree at all that we all pay so we all deserve ... we all have times of need ... but if you are wealthy and taking out way more than you are putting in ... chronically ... I would have a problem with that. And of course you minimize your clients' tax bill. I guess it might suggest there is a need for tax reform if too much is escaping scrutiny.

I think best "available" is the issue perhaps. idunno

I can't find the Star link for this, but the article isn't too long, and interesting possibilities. My goodness. I had no idea. If it is as it seems. I am aware, though that EI is high among people in family businesses, presumably they take turns working enough to qualify perhaps? Hundreds of rich pay no tax: Study Wealthy also collecting EI, welfare payments Dean Beeby CANADIAN PRESS HALIFAX — Hundreds of Canada's richest residents pay no income tax — and some of them collect welfare, says a new federal study. And the number of rich Canadians who pay no income tax is growing rapidly, almost doubling between 1997 and 1999. The findings appear in a Canada Customs and Revenue Agency portrait of Canada's wealthiest income-earners, based on data from 1997-99 tax returns and released under the Access to Information Act. The study identified 78,230 people in Canada who reported annual incomes in excess of $250,000 in 1999, up about a third from 1997 as the burgeoning economy made more Canadians rich. The agency chose the $250,000 threshold because it's the same cut-off used by Statistics Canada when studying the country's wealthy elite. Of those high-income earners, 579 paid no income taxes in 1999 — a big jump from the 318 high-income earners who paid no taxes in 1997. That increase — 82 per cent over three years — was far larger than the 35 per cent over-all rise in high-income earners in the same period. The findings suggest wealthy Canadians are becoming more adept at finding ways to avoid income taxes. The report, heavily censored in parts, was written to help tax auditors by listing the likely characteristics of tax cheats, based on such factors as geography, sex and marital status. Information about the high-risk groups has been carefully deleted. The study, dated March, 2001 and marked "draft," also found more than 600 of Canada's wealthiest collected employment insurance, welfare or workers' compensation payments in 1999. That's half again as many as those who collected such payments in 1997. Forty-five people listed welfare payments as part of their income on their 1999 tax returns, though the study does not indicate their provinces or cities. Another 308 collected workers' compensation payments, while 290 received employment insurance. Federal officials noted that workers' compensation and employment insurance benefits are paid without regard to the recipients' income. Welfare payments administered by the provinces and municipalities, on the other hand, are normally restricted to those with low incomes. However, an agency official said information from individual returns is treated as confidential and is not shared with police or other authorities even if fraud is suspected. "It's a confidential matter between us and the client," said Collette Gentes-Hawn, though tax auditors do have access. She also said business and investment losses can sometimes be high enough that no income tax need be paid even for high earners. "You might have earned $250,000 worth of salary but you may also have had a business that had a loss of $250,000 or more," she said from Ottawa. The business loss can then be deducted from income. Word of the wealthy tax-avoiders comes as the Federal Court of Canada hears a challenge in Winnipeg of a federal tax loophole that allowed a $2.2 billion family trust to leave Canada tax free in 1991. The hearing continues today. The wealthy family benefiting from the loophole has never been officially identified, though speculation has pointed to the Bronfmans of Montreal. They have refused to comment on the case. ................... Those who pay no taxes, would think, would be those who live off investments and shelter all of it. Workers' comp and EI are not income dependent, but the welfare is hard to account for, unless it was also paid back in some cases. If the kids left home, how could it show up in their parents income tax? It's not clear. A bit overstated by the Star, so I added the ?? to the thread title. I have concerns about the "no taxes" but not the public money.

I think we have some information to suggest they may not be the best.