August1991

I was intrigued to see this report referring to fighting in Yemen in the past three weeks or so: Admittedly, the toll may be smaller.Reuters and Yemen I have tried to find numbers for Iraq in a similar time frame and I found this: By my rough estimate, that is low hundreds.Australian news source Iraq obviously attracts alot more attention than Yemen. But in the Iraq case, one car bomb leads to numerous news reports spread out over several days. The impression differs from reality.

Don't you think this is something the Iraqi people should decide? They have already seen too much of their country's fate determined by outsiders. Surely they should be now free to determine this question in their own way.

Given some of the yahoos on this forum, one wonders whether Canada is a help or a hindrance.But seriously, Cartman, that is part of the question. There are very few French Quebecers who believe that English Canada helps ensure the cultural integrity. (To translate, would you believe that the US helps to ensure the integrity of Canadian culture against the onslaught of globalisation?) IMV, Quebecers' attachment to Canada is mostly practical, with a dose of blind tradition. There is a backlash against the union-nanny-state-establishment PQ but I don't know if it is pro or anti independance. (Call this the TalkNumb effect, à la québécoise.) Many of the posters to this web site, and certainly those on the left, seem to be Canadian nationalists with a deep suspicion about the United States. Translated into Quebec, they would all be péquistes. That's impossible. The state of Michigan suffered worse, if Michael Moore is to be believed. What's your point? What part of ROC fears most or is most opposed to negotiating a special status for Quebec? (Let's say, fiscal autonomy with contributions to the central state on an issue by issue basis. Obviously, Quebec would no longer receive any transfer payments.)

There are all kinds of ways to define membership in a club.Any Jew in the world can become a citizen of Israel. Anyone of German background can claim citizenship in Germany. Anyone born anywhere to at least one Canadian parent can be a Canadian citizen. I have never heard anyone suggest that Quebec citizens be anything other than those resident on the territory of Quebec. At present, the typical determination is who is entitled to provincial health insurance. Thank you, MS. However one feels about Canada or Quebec, there is something called objective truth.

True, the softwood tariffs and the mad cow ban were set by the US federal government. Considering the numerous products crossing the border, this can hardly be called a blockade. The FTA was designed precisely to limit this kind of government intervention. "All trade deals and rules are set by and agreed to by governments." That's simply false. Contract law is largely private. It is individuals that agree to a deal, negotiating the terms as they see fit. "All regulation involving the production and consumption of good are set by central governments." Is the US a socialist country? ---- From abroad, we confuse the United States the country and the US federal government. In fact, the two are not the same thing at all. Is "Canada" our government in Ottawa? At least you understand that the sole entity capable of "stupid bully tactics" is the US government. This is a succinct argument in favour of limited government in all countries. But will you make more money by opening up shops abroad? If you will, then do it. (I'm not against Canadians buying non-US products, or selling in non-US markets. I'm against the Canadian government forcing us to do it.) Wait, wait. Why should the government assume risks and not the individual shop keeper? Who understands risks better? Diversification is one way to avoid risk. There are many others.And what is the risk? That the US government will take an action that will harm the American people! The softwood lumber tariff is not good for the United States. If you don't like this argument, consider this example: Finland and the Soviet Union. Finland prospered by having most of its trade with the Soviets. IME, many English Canadians have a dislike of Americans and want as little to do with them as possible. This emotion colours all debates. I'm not certain about the source of this emotion. ********************************* 2001 data on world wheat exporters is available here. 2001 data on world wheat importers is available here. The CWB is a marketing monopoly. To export Candian wheat, you have to go through the CWB. The issue is whether the CWB has any world market power and hence could make world prices higher by reducing quantity sold (like OPEC and Saudi Arabia). The short answer is no because Canadian wheat doesn't dominate the market. US wheat represents about 28% of the world market and the US is a "price leader". That is, the US price is the world price. But since the US price is determined by market forces within the US, this is not evidence of monopoly power. (The US price is obviously influenced by US government wheat subsidies and this would drive world prices down, not up.) The CWB is a method to subsidize Canadian farmers: This is from the CWB web site. As a large bureaucracy, any gains are probably lost though. I would not be surprised to learn that farmers are increasingly dissatisfied with the CWB.

By that logic, Canada should join the United States and we'd all be richer. And Canada is one of those silly places in the world that force radio and TV stations to play "Canadian" content. WTF?

In Canada, or NB. Well they used to be in NS but then... And how long have they had their language rights respected? What's the rate of assimilation even now? They have their own state in a country without a majority. And you're going to go far in the Indian world if you only speak Tamil. For all intents, assimilated. This one I might agree with except it would be tough to say the Flemish form a majority. Belgium is rather two scorpions eyeing each other in a bottle. Hmmm. Does French Quebec treat Anglos as well as the English treat the Scottish? There has always been an Anglo in the Quebec Cabinet. Has there always been a Scot in London?Who is more resentful, a Scot or an English Montrealer? I'd go with the Scot.

It is the federalists in Quebec, the Jean Chretiens and the Denis Coderres, who are doing this. They were the ones who bought all those flags. Find me an ethnic minority, anywhere in the world, that is as well treated as the Anglophones of Quebec. Is your point worth going to war over? The people currently living on Quebec territory are perfectly aware of what that means. It would not be practical to divide the island of Montreal. The people of Quebec have extremely strong feelings about this.----- I think you are viewing this too dramatically. This situation will be resolved in typical Canadian fashion. It will be boring. Quebec will obtain autonomy within Canada. This would be ideal for everyone.

Quebec independance is not strictly a question of money. Most people who favour independance have not made a profit/loss calculation, and indeed they have no desire to make one. In western Canada, it seems common to think that Quebec independance is a bluff to extort money from the federal government. Nothing could be further from the truth. The fact of the matter is that the question of Quebec independance will not go away. The Charest government is unpopular now and it appears it may be a one-term government. (It has three years to go so alot can change.) With the PQ, there will be another referendum. Two last points: By choosing Lapierre, PM PM implicitly rejected the Trudeau-style of federalism. Watch carefully for the cabinet portfolios given to Dion and Lapierre (if Dion gets one). Second, it was painfully obvious to everyone in Quebec that no one in the federal government was capable of confronting Duceppe in the past election.

If you look at a clear night sky far from a city's lights, you can see about 4000 stars. All these stars are suns in our galaxy, the Milky Way. In fact though, there are about 100 billion stars in our galaxy. And it is estimated that there are at least 125 billion galaxies in the universe. These numbers are so beyond anything comprehensible that literally anything is possible. If you say there is "one chance in a billion of life evolving in a solar system", then in the universe, it would have happened 10 trillion times.

Taking your toys and going home? Why?

Off the top of my head, South Korea in 1953, Lebanon in 1958 and all of Eastern Europe in the early 1990s, Kuwait in 1991.You may disagree about "installing democracy" so I'll refer to "installing sovereignty". Keep in mind that between 1945 and 1991, the US was involved in a Cold War. The battles of this war were not easy and the priority was to defeat the enemy. And the US eventually did. (I am not saying that Ronald Reagan defeated communism. I'm saying that all the US administrations from Truman to Bush did.) But look, Rev, I think Hugo is logically correct. He gave a counter example to your claim and that's enough to disprove it.

Interesting debate, guys, but keep it respectful. DAC, you have just replaced faith with the scientific method. A doctor can advise me about arteries because people have conducted experiments and drawn conclusions. These can then be used to make predictions that turn out to be true. Nobody who claims that I will exist for all eternity in hell if I don't believe in Christ has done anything of the sort.

Example? But you were "profiled" and you provided some valuable information to society by your purchases. You "voted".Everytime anyone buys something, using a credit card or cash, they "vote" for the item. Corporations, if you will, respond to that vote. My point is that cash means a virtually anonymous vote. or pay Gil Parent's salary. My own favourite is Sergio Marchi. But hey, someone's gotta sit at the chair.

As do the shareholders on any revenues made on those foreign ships.The only tax avoided is the corporation tax which, IMV, should be abolished anyway.

IMV, Cartman, you have asked a fundamental question. How to know that people are telling the truth? People claim to be good, or bad drivers; the truth is another thing. How to make people tell the truth? Well, are people honest when they buy? For example, did you buy anything in the past week, using cash, that you prefer to keep secret? IOW, I think people are most honest when they buy using cash. Also, I think that no society based on dishonesty will last for long. IOW, no society that does not accept ambiguity will last for long. Paper money is a good thing for civilized society. It exposes honesty in an anonymous way.

Sour grapes?Quebec defends its interests. So does Newfoundland (and Labrador too). The Maritimes vote Liberal. And Ontario seems to get what it wants (while pretending it is Canada). Play the game, or astonish the rest of us by changing the rules of the game.

The following is from the CSL web site. These are CSL's lake ships. Ordinary people can lease or buy cars now too. True.To argue that CSL is engaging in tax evasion is false. To say it is not paying its fair share would be demagogic. ---- On the other hand, the shipping industry is closely tied (like so much else in Canada) to the government. Argus listed a variety of government services such as the Coast Guard which are used by shipping companies. There are many businesses in Canada (transportation and communication) where government contacts are the determining factor in success. As to the cocaine on the boat, since the boat was bringing coal to Nova Scotia Power, it's an indication that CSL has probably a monopoly on government shipping contracts to Canada. IOW, if you want to ship cocaine from Venezuela to Canada on a bulk carrier, you gotta use CSL.

Corporations are neither people nor citizens. They are a series of contracts between people. It makes as much sense to say a corporation is a citizen as to say a marriage is a citizen. All taxes are ultimately paid by individuals.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Ralph Klein mayor of Calgary before? And wasn't he a few french fries short of a Happy Meal then? What's new?

What the Cons have to do: Warren Kinsella blog 2 July 2004 Or, take a look at this: G&M article I'm no marketing guy but I think an ad in Ontario with a cool woman's voice saying that "PM PM wants to fix health care but he cut x billion $ from health care in 1995 and the provincial liberal gov't just imposed health premiums... To Liberals, Canada seems to be just a Canadian flag they can buy." IOW, the Tories should have played the nationalist card and tied it in with the sponsorship scandal. But to do that is ugly.

Certainly not.I'm saying that pundits look at the voter turn out statistic as some kind of measure of "good citizenship". I'm saying that a far better measure of good citizenship is respect for tax laws. The more tax evasion there is, the less people feel the government is legitimate. As to voting, everyone should have the right and those who want to should get involved. I would have absolutely no problem with voter turn out falling to 20%. Implicitly, the non-voters agree with the decision of the others and if not, they would presumably get involved. But I'll repeat. Paying taxes is a better measure of citizenship (or measure of our respect for the State).

In the shipping business, it is imperative. There is no way to compete otherwise.The bigger issue is that corporate taxes are on the way out. They are a very bad form of taxation; almost as bad as the high taxation of social payments and payroll "taxes" such as EI and state pension plan (CPP/QPP) payments. Eastern Europe is following the Irish approach; the US will eventually do the same. Irish Site The best sources of government revenue are VAT, income tax, property tax and user fees. I would love to see environmental taxes. They even have the potential to be politically popular once politicians figure them out.

Chantal Hebert in the Toronto Star This may be a little inflammatory but she's not wrong either. If Alberta defended its rights as strongly as Quebec does, Canada would arguably be a different country.

That is precisely the point. Canadians do not deal with a large, single customer called Mr. America. We deal with many, many individuals and firms. One of those individuals can decide to be a bully, but not all of them simultaneously. True, you are now indicating the one entity that could possibly enforce a bullying cartel against us: the US federal government. The US constitution limits severely the power of the US executive branch. We negotiated the FTA to make US government intervention more difficult.By and large, it has been a success. Lastly, I will just note that the problem here is the US government.