Denny

Lazurus, that is the most well thought out and well written comment on this thread so far. I guess we don't know the kind of things police experience. I can confess to getting into some rough scuffles with my son who was very difficult as a teenager. Nothing life or limb risking mind you, but some punches and wrestling. I could not abide his defiance. And, you are right, it does not matter much the root of the defiance, in this case, his use of bad language or if it had been his religious choices. It just became a "chemistry" thing. He was able to push all my bad buttons and I was was always able to set off his likewise. Some people look for any event that props up their cause of choice, whether its female rights or its anti-immigration. I hope in this case Canada checked out this immigrant, that he had no history of violent crime. But, that is all that can be done. A person with no existing criminal record can become a killer, whether this is out of greed or its out of emotional hysteria. On the first score, checking the background, I wonder at times about this, My previous neighbour, an East European, had committed acts of violence in his past in his native land and yet he was accepted to Canada as an immigrant. HBe went on to drink excessively and get into fights, especially his own family, but others too. Considering the impact one short tempered person can make to society, it wold be worth our while as a country to do a good background check on each immigrant and maybe even a psychological assessment. Employers frequently do that. Its even more important that our country do that. Immigrants pay considerable processing fees to the government, so that may well fund this.

Julienne, I am happy to see your energy, but I have to be critical of you and so many Canadians who always think the ultimate answer to our government spending problems is re-cutting the pie. In history, you no doubt learned about the concept of "responsible government". Unfortunately, as of late, irresponsible government seems to be the way politicians succeed. Responsible government says that the people we elect develop their own spending plans and balance them with their revenues, not connive to get them from somewhere else.. If you believe in the need to spend more, you tax more. You don't go another level of govnernment with your hat in hand. If Toronto needs something, its makes sense for Torontonians to pay for it, not the people in Kenora, who may come to Toronto half a dozen times in their lives. If Torontoonaians are against the tax change, then the po;itical leadership has to adjust to that reality or lose their jobs. That is "responsibility". Shuffling taxes from one goverment level to another is not. Toronto cries poor to get transit funding, all the while finding that it gets extra tax revenues when a new subway line goes in. I think there are many deficiencies in our tax system. For instance I believe that taxes should be user based, with the exception of social needs, such as health and education and the like which should be funded by progressive income tax. Property taxes should bear only the costs of policing property and fire protection. User taxes on fuels should fund all road work. A small levy on retail sales should fund consumer and corporate affairs. A small tax on payrolls to fund the Department of Labour, etc. That would be true responsibility.

Despite all our problems and issues, the reality is that Canada ha been blessed with its resources, including our most important sustainable resource for the the future, being agriculture. Let us all give thanks to the Lord for our blessings.

It seems that we all pay taxes to sjupport land titles offices, and they also recdeive fees. Why don't the Indians have to follow the process too, they are just as subject to th recordds in gthe titles office as anybody else, but they seem to believe they have their own divine right to ignore due process. I don't doubt there are areas in which the land was not conveyed properly years ago, but in Caldonia, the deeds were registered. If we go too far back in history, we jsut get lost. Who is to say my great, great grandfather was not cheated out of some land in downtown Toronto years ago? In fact, I just found a note from him in the family bible showing how somebody grabbed his house and two acre lot in the beach district when he off in the Yukon in the 1890's, and claimed he traded it for a horse and cart. Hey, that makes me the rightful owner. Guess I'll have to bulldoze that bank and those stores off my land. Of course my anecdote is fictional, but the reality is we don't know just went down, do we? That is why we rely on land titles offices.

As somebody employed by a company with publicly accessible cable boxes, let me tell you that graffitti and posters create a real nuisance. We spedn over $65,000 a year just inthe southern Ontario area to clean up the aftermath of this kind of thing. It is such an eyesore in cities to see all these posters on the poles and power boxes, newspaper boses and mailboxes. Free speech is not free postering. I don't think those folks would have been arrested in they paraded around in tee shirts with their slogans on them. But, they should not be allowed to put their stuff on public property, just their own private property.

You said what I wanted to say, but better and more forcefully. I'll put some stock in the UN's usefullness when it comes to human rights, the day they lead the charge to oust the oppressor, Robert Mugabe.

I am voting for the Liberals, more for my candidate, than for Dalton McGuinty. But, I think even Dalton is better than John Tory, although I do support faith based schools. I like the Liberals for haivng hte vison to and chutzpah to make their MoveOntario 2020 plan. The transit improvements wil be the key to keep the Toronto area thriving through the upcoming years of ever more expensive fuel, and presently exsting gridlock. The Tories seem to want to dig themselves into a hole like groundhogs, afraid of the light, favoring the past.

Given the nature ofhte rip-off schemes perpetrated to fleece Bay ST. (and some Wall St.) investors of their coin over the years, how is that the Americans are the only ones who seem to give a care for trhe stock investor. Once again today, it was the U.S. SEC, not our OSC, who laid charges against some former Nortel execs. In both accounting and law enforcement, Canadian investors are treated as meat for the Bay Streeet wolves. Let's not forget the BreX guy who just got off the hook by our court system here, he was just found to be an incompetent liar, not a crook. But, he now owns the Caribbean mansion, whereas some of the Bre-X investors were skinned alive, albeit with some greed on their part too.

Families have been de-emphasized for far too long in our society. Some of this is social trends, hard to change, but some simple things like government tax policies can easily be changed. For so many families, the wife has to work. I recall back in the '60's, the relative amount of tax deductions for wives and children was much greater, relatively speaking. In a sense, the govnerment recognized the value of stay home mothers by giving a good incentive in the form of a good tax break for the family. But, only to legal families, in which a covenant existed between man and wife. Not a common-law shack up. Parenting was taught to us at school to be a vocation. It was a high level of responsibility one aspired to. And, the permanence of marriage. Not now. I like the U.S. approach to income taxation, in that it recognizes the family as the basic economic unit. It makes no difference for taxes whether the combined family income is earned 50/50 or 100/0 between man and wife.

In reading this article today in CNN Money, it seems the U.S. never followed though to bring stability, security and prosperity to Iraq, as it committed back in 2002. See Iraq Oil Riches Languish Some quotes, which are just like late 2002: "Hundreds of thousands of barrels a day are lost to smuggling, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office. Insurgents have launched hundreds of hit-and-run attacks on oil pipelines. " ""The current crude production is about 2.4 million barrels per day," Shahristani said. "That is the highest it has been since the fall of the regime" nearly four and a half years ago. That figure is exaggerated, according to some analysts. The Washington-based oil consultancy PFC Energy estimates Iraq's oil output at about 1.9 million, and predicts that level will hold through 2008, because of enduring violence and war damage." I recall all the news back in 2002, about how the U.S. would renew the aged Iraq oil infratructure. Nothing has been accomplished. Instead, oil output is lower than under Saddam, when oil exports were restricted by the U.N. The outcome of this war has been just a plain fiasco all around. I heard a U.S. general interviewed on the news yesterday who claimed that U.S. forces were stretched to maintain the levels of about 160,000 in Iraq. But, I remember when the U.S. had 500,000 men in Vietnam, back 35 years ago or more. Considering the war was militarily won five years ago, the occupation has been poorly done. I am sure countries decimated in Workld War II, such as Germany and Japan were back on their feet by 1950 and exporting goods, much more than Iraq is today. Instead of pulling out its troops, it may be time for the U.S. to put in many more and clean up the mess they started in 2002. Otherwise, all the men (and women) lost in the years between will be in vain. Many Americans were expecting to see oil prices go down after the Iraq victory, so this has been a disappointment for sure. I think it impact the Republican party prospects for the future if they don't get things fixed up soon.

I heard that the police in Australia spent over $120 million for the security for these APEC talks. That is bizzare, a real waste of tax money. Would it not have been much cheaper for these world leaders to meet in a more secluded place than Sydney? Recall the meeting held in Canda a couple of years back in the Rockies. That extra money could have goone to feed the poor or support the military. Mahybe Austrialia shold have considered a "Crocodile Dundee" theme in the outback.

Like most people, I wil always remember that day, which was also a Tuesday. I was heading west on the Toronto Queen streetcar after work, and a couple from the U.S. was asking the driver how to get to Union Station. I was heading that way, and so escorted them there on the subway. They seemed truly shell shocked, were cutting short their stay in Toronto to head home to Atlanta. But, now they had to travel by train. I recall suggesting they go via Chicago, to avoid New York. Or else head to Buffalo and rent a car to go one way. I realized then how dependant all society was on air travel, and how we take its ease for granted.

Harper is right on about this. Its not his personal opinion, it was considered by Parliament and they gave directives to Elections Canada about visual verification for voting. Parliament's demands trump the agencies of the government, including Elections Canada That is entirely reasonable. Our voting system, to have integegrity must ensure that people have no openings to impersonate others to skew votes. Many years ago, before the advent of photo i.d., that was generally accomplished by having all polling places small enough that the workers and scrutineers had some familiarity with those in their neighbourhoods by sight. But, even that does not work in the casee of people concealing their faces. I don't understand any faith precluding their faithful from common sense actions that involve the element of practical purpose. For instance, Catholics fast on certain days, but if someone is sick, then they can eat what they must to get well. Most faiths demand modesty, but it does not obviously apply to the contact with a medical doctor for the purpose of availing oneself of examination and treatment. If a faith gets to the extreme where it does not permit common sense to be used by its adherents, then I can't see any reason for society to respect its demands.

I think it should be obvious that when your are incarcerated, you lose a lot of your personal rights. You have shown yourself to be a "non-player" by society's rules, so you should not benefit from society's freedoms either.

I think it should be obvious that when your are incarcerated, you lose a lot of your personal rights. You have shown yourself to be a "non-player" by society's rules, so you should not benefit from society's freedoms either.

Firsdt past the post is not the greatest, but at least it compels politicians to develop platforms with wide appeal and use some compromise. Countries which have used proportional voting system seem to result in indecisive governments and overly frequent elections due to impasses. I still say the Australian method is the best as it provides that window of opportunity for new paties and even independent candidates, while giving those voters the full use of their ballot to select their second and third level preferences if their condiate is dropped in succesive rounds of the result tabulations.

The whole argument about "low stumpage fees" puzzles me. I don't pretend to be an expert, but I thought public auction determined the stumpage fees in Canadian practice. You can't get much more free market than an auction. The other thing that makes the stumpage fees look low is that the lumber firms bidding have to undertake the reforestation work as a part of the deal, and this by nature reflecgts itself in the lower apparent stumpage fees than exiet int he U.S. where the owners or the government, for public owned lands, bears the reforestation costs. Correct me if I am in error on these points.

I dont' think we shold mix relgioin with govenrment either, but schools are not government. Who is to say the Creationism is off base? There are many highly educated Chistian leaders in the U.S.A. who support creationsim, such as recently deceased Dr. Kennedy. I think Canada is somewhat of an oddball, by embracing such a secular outlook in education, particularly higher education. Most countries in the world, outside of Europe and the U.S.A., have a primary focus on religious schools. And, in future, the U.S.A. is leaning that way too, with the use of a voucher system for education. The U.S., despite its offical secular stance, has even opened the door to many faith based ventures (eg - health care, prisons, and health clinics) tax supported to serve the public. But, they cannot mix the religious teachigs with their services. For instance, a Catholic clinic cannot force patents to attend services. What is ironic, is that it is Canada which officially recognizes God in its constitution and national anthem. Some days, I think God feels short changed by our repudiation of him in our actions.

In many cases, new faith based schools would be created, with a cost saving offset of dismantling or swapping public schools. In other cases, existing faith based schools would now be funded, but with no cost saving offset in the public schools. But, that will especially help those families who have been sacrificing to send their kids to faith based schools as things now stand. If we can afford it for several hundred thousand Catholic families we can certainly afford it for the few thousand existing private faith based schools too. I don't understand why people all think John Tory "blew it". Faith based schools are important to many parents, and perhaps the best kind who want to ensure their children are raised in a loving and God-fearing environment. If Ontario can do this for Catholic kids, why not Jewish and Muslim and Baptist kids too? Personally, I have nothing to gain by this, except the hope that a generation raised in a faith filled environment will be respectful, law abiding and peaceful, a better world to leave to future generations. Though, I can't say I am overly impressed by many of the Catholic high school kids in our area, many of them seem to smoke and even the girls use a lot of very rough sexual type curse words and tease the others taht way. I have called the school from time to time with some descriptions, but they don't seem interested in doing much. Not like when I was about 7 and got the paddle form my principal for taking a short cut through a neighbour's yard on the way home. I'd be much happier if these girls took a short cut though my yard, and used clean lagnuage. These are future mothers to be. So, the new faith based schools should put an emphasis on behaviour inside and outside the school. So the neighbours are proud and happy to have such a school in their midst. I would think the majority of Ontarians, being Christian, would appreciate John Tory's ideas. Sure he may lose the odd atheist voter, but they don't amount to much anyway.

Kitchener set an all time record for any Septembr day in history on Sept. 6.

I think the fedral government - both the Liberals before and the Conservatives now - have done a terrible job of defining the war strategy in such a way that it encourages Canadians, and gives us all the expectation of victory. It seems that we are just making strikes here and there, then moving on to a different locale and letting the Taliban regroup in the palce we left behind. But, Afghanistan is a very large country in area. We really do not have control, we are just putting up a show of force there. This is not just a Canadian problem, its a lack of a coherent vision by the whole UN contingent there. It seems we (the U.N. forces, that is) are imitating the failed tactics of the Soviet Union back in the 90's. Just think how fast things would progress if the U.S. had 1 million men there, U.K. 200,000, Canada 100,000, etc. Those are not that high a force to raise, let's not forget that Canada, a nation of just 11 million going into WWII had over 700,000 men oveseas! So, relatively speaking, for us to raise 100,000 men today is a walk in the park by comparison. Let's say among the U.N we could get 2 millon men (and women) there. We could take complete control of the situation, seal the borders and draw an ever constricting ring around the Taliban, while purging the country of the guns and explosives. This was done in Germany years ago, and it worked swiftly, from D-Day to surrender was all of 10 months. And, don't fortget that Germany was more technically advanced then that the Taliban is today. If we had prosecuted the war against Germany, back in WWII, as has been done so far with Afghanistan, we'd still be there, but would have lost so many men over the years. If a war is worth doing, its worth doing all out. (No, I don't mean bombings, I mean a proper occupation.) I'd personally support a full out initiative by enlisting myself. If Afghanistan is not that important to warrant a sufficient effort to gain an expedited victory, then let's pack up our stuff and get out.

What do you think of the referendum this fall on the future provincial elections in Ontario? I am dead set against the proportional representation approach for two big reaons: 1 - It leads to indecison within parliament. 2- It would establish two "classes" of MLA's - the "regualr"ones who represent constitutents in a geographic riding and the others who would only represent theiur party position and therefore not have to deal with the problems of the man or woman on the street. I really like the Australian method better, in which one ranks candidates, and so one's vote is not wasted if one votes for a fringe candidate. If your first choice falls to the bottom ranks of the voting count, then your second voting choice is used. Much like the way parties select leaders. The result is that ultimately, one candidate actually has a majority of the voters in their corner, even if ins some cases its the voters second choice. Unlike our current system in which its possible, and frequently happens, for the NDP to get 18% of the vote, the Liberals to get 40% and the Conservative to get 42%, with the Conservative winning even though likely the Liberal could have picked up most of the 18% of the voters who went to the NDP.

I support faith based elementary schools, but only to the extent they do not add to the taxpayer burden. I'd restrict it to elementary schools as provision of faith based secondary schools would entail so many fixed assets to provide a fair level of vocational programs. It as a mistake to extend fundig to Catholic secondary schools, these were not conceived as part of hte schoold systme under the BNA Act of 1867. This is how it could work, exactly like the original rules that the separate schools worked under at their origin. 1 - The province could fund on a per student basis, the variable cost element of schools. That is the direct teacher, principal books and accomodation costs only, following defined ratios. 2 - A separate faith based school could be established provided it met a minimum attendance threshold, let's say that the norm would be one classrom per grade. That may imply that a K-8 school would need a threshold enrollment of about 300 students. 3 - The true overhead of the school board, and transportation would be the responsibility of the parents who enrlled in the faith based school. Thus, this approach would allow for faih based school without impairing the public schools. If its just the variable cost per student involve,d then that is the identical money that would be incurred to educate that student in the public or the faith based school. Public school boards would be free to sell off vacated schools to the other school boards. For instance, in the Bathurst St. area of Toronto, one could easily envision several Hebrew schools qualifying under such an arrangement. Let us say that 5 out of seven public schools in the ara were converted to Hebrew schools. Thus, the public board is relieved of thsoe teachers, principals and buildings, so they would save that money involved, and get proportianally less tax money. Instad, that tax money would flow to th Hebrew schools, but not to covr the "ineffciencies" involved of school board administration or school busing, that would have to be covered by a levey paid by parents. It cold be relatively modest, and perhaps parent volunteers ocld take on schoold su chores or adminstiatrive wrok to ease the cash burden. That happened years ago in Catholic schools, when many board members were not paid and when religious orders did a lot of the teaching work for modest cost. Even the teacher salaries in the Catholic schools years ago were 5% to 10% below public school rates.

First off, I don't know that having just under 25% of the work force in the public sector is an extreme. Public sector includes many employers, not just gonvernment, it includes school boards, hospitals, postal service, military, not just what we think of as government workers inhabiting offices and sucking in our tax dollars. Many public sector agencies are now self funding, they rely on sedrvice charges or fees, not taxes. It owld be enlightening to see what the proproti of public sector workdrs in other ocuntr5ies to comapre, and you'd have to add in the high extent of U.S. private secotr educiton and health care to get a fair comparison. Now, as to their incomes, I think it is true that public sector salaries and benefits unfairly exceed the people they serve. I do not see that dealing with unions holding monopoly powers is fair or just and these unions should be eliminated. It seems rather stupid for the government to allow and even encourage unions for their own employees, when they should be acting on the behalf of the taxpayer and setting up salary polices which reward public sector workers through a form of compulsory arbitration relative to others in the economy of like skill. Since the government makes the rules, why on earth did they ever allow unions in the public sector? Seems mighty dumb, or else our politicians have sold out to the unions. And, such a salary review program should also consder the relative security of public sector work which tends to be stable through inflations or recession. I think the U.S. federal service does not allow strikes, and it seems to retain people well enough. Some one has commented that public sector upper level management is relatavely incompetent. I can't say that is true, as a close relative was employed by the post office as an executive of sorts and he one day commented that due to his indexed pension, it had a commuted value of over $1.2 million. That is what the present value of the stream of pension payouts was estimated to be with inflation at 3%, from his date of retirement at age 57. That seemed like a fairly competent decison he made to stay in that line of work. Oh, and he also enjoyed 7 weeks of vacation a year. How many private sector execs woudl get that perk? Never had to worry about a competitor stealing the business and leaving him laid off. Oh, and he did get bonuses, over $25,000 per year in good times.