willy

It is not about deterrent. Past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour and in the case of murder one is enough. If you hold them until they are older than 60 at least their capacity will be limited when they get out. This is about public safety and not the rights of murderers.

takeanumber, I asume you are refering to the UofC numbers as most of the time you refer to UofC stuff. What does it take to get into UofC this year? I don't know. I will guess, Arts needs 75%. Am I close? I was only talking about policy minimums. If you say I am wrong, correct me.

Maplesyrup, murders should not be in half way houses. I think this is what the mayor of Vernon is fighting for. Some crimes should not get a second chance. Just curious. You seem to have minimized 3 murders in 8 years. When would the number become unacceptable?

Cartmen, as you probably already know 67% is the mandatory minimum for all faculties at UBC. I think SFU is the same at 67%. The University of Alberta it is 65% and Calgary is the same. The competition for spaces actually decides the real grade point average needed. The 90% I was referring to is the actual grade average over the five courses mentioned to get into business. Arts programs are in the mid 80s and science is also approaching 90%. No school out west admits kids with the minimum. I got these numbers from kids I coach that are applying to school. As for writing skills, they now have an essay component to enter SFU as well. We have many English as a second language students on the left coast and this is an issue for them. They are more than qualified to enter higher education in math and science but find English grammar a challenge; as I would find the French a challenge if I went to Laval. Kids are the same, today as they were 40 years ago; the only difference is the technology. The technology may have affected the spelling (always having a spell checker) but not the thought. Today with the research tools on the internet and in schools the products undergrads produce are of better quality even if they need an editor. I have worked with many bright teenagers in the last few years and they surprise me all the time. Hey I am not 30 yet, maybe I am biased. How so? The BCLiberals added 12 000 seats to the provinces universities and turned the college in the interior into part of UBC. They lifted the freeze on tuition so universities could get more resources. You show me a link to where they cut anything to universities. The fact is they have added. The demand is just outpacing the resources. I am not whining. I am stating an opinion that I think we should expand our spaces to allow for more qualified people to enjoy the opportunity of a higher education. You seem to have a misguided notion that the standards are to low. That is just not so.

Cartman, to enter UBC this year a student will need 90% average coming out of high school. The fact that a student with 75% could perform at the university level but can't get in bothers me. Today the cost and standards are much higher. Today more people value a university education. In the 1960s you could get into many universities in Canada with 60% average coming out of high school. I don't accept your premise that the cost has restricted access to talented students but the greater demand for seats sure has limited many able students. The shame from a social mobility stand point is poor kids do worse in grade school but can reach their potential in university. The high admission standard may be a larger barrier than that of high tuition.

takeanumber, we are competing with 25% duties. Let them get their ball and go home. We have a more efficient operation. This one is for us to win in the end.

maplesyrup, I know you have no idea what I am talking about. You clearly stated that we are only spending 2% more than inflation and inflation was 68% and in health spending 70%. In real dollars then we just need more money. That was the argument as the current resources are causing great line ups and limiting services. Unless health care is actually more expensive today than it was 10 years ago. That would mean we have not kept pace with real costs. i.e. new procedures, expensive medicines, new equipment, higher labour costs. We may be getting less for more money. Scott's analysis is simplistic and misleading. If he has sound credentials, he would know that.

We don't have a proper agreement on softwood. That is part of the problem. So we pull completely out. What have you accomplished? They can then legally put duties over any import they like and with the deficit they run on imports they will. Just listen to John Edwards protectionist rants. Scares the heck out to this Canadian who is active with trading in the US, how about we continue to set up better agreements with more open boarders.

Lumber prices were highest in 1994. The softwood tariffs didn't start until 2001. The damage was done along time ago. Since the BCLiberals took over, we had the emergence of softwood trade tariffs, BSE, SARS, 911 aftermath, and the worst fire seasons in a long time. And yes the economy still turned around. As for municipal infrastructure look to Ottawa and ask when if ever they will follow through on a promise to pay for something. The last I heard the GST rebates have now been pushed to next year maybe. Hey if they wait long enough they can announce it again, and get another round of political payoff. Kind of like the 2B for health care last year, 8 announcements and no money.

Great then maplesyrup, all we have to do is raise taxes 60% and we can pay for all the improvements we need in healthcare. Wait if I factor all the taxes I pay now into the equation, I already pay 50% of my income in taxes. What should I pay for my housing with, my food or transportation? I guess it will all be fine if only the government paid for: Housing Food Education Dental Medical Roads Policing Ect. Wait if I pay more taxes just for health care, where will the money come from for all these other government programs. Hey they are government, they can always print more money.(i.e. Brazil, Argintina) When inflation goes up in the 1000% maybe the IMF will help us out. Oh wait they might have conditions. The last time they did that the countries had to privatize most of the state run organizations, even water. Hey we could always just prioritize and be prudent. I like socialism, it is a wonderful idea, but the math never balances.

Even if you make $70, 000 a year you can't buy a home in Vancouver, so how much should the minimum be. This is supply and demand. If everyone has more the prices go up. Please a little commons sense with the economics please. I will tell you what though, you can buy a nice home in Regina working for $20 an hour. We are free to go, and if you stay in the highest priced housing market in the country don't expect me to pay for your house. Average cost of a detached home in Vancouver is now over $400 000. The average price of a condo is $245 000. We better have a good rapid transit system to the suburbs because a lot of people with a lot of money can't afford to live in Vancouver. Not to mention if you make that much you wont be shopping at Walmart anymore.

But do they? The question was rhetorical. They don't. The actual minimum wage in BC is $7.50. They did create a program to help young people enter the work force, so for the first 200 hours they can have a lower wage $6.00.

If funding is your concern, you can stop worrying. They have added 3 billion in spending in the last 3 years. The health system here is a real mess but it is a historical mess that has been in the making for 20 years. To change the system the different units will have to work together and they seem to not be able to do that. The BCMA can't even talk on behalf of their members. The nurses are too militant to cooperate. The health regions are too bureaucratic. (Resist change and focus on process and ass covering, may also tend to empire build) What do you suggest to fix this wonderful mess? More money wont do it. I am serious when I say look into the Alberta model. They took years building up trust and partnerships but the government, regions, and physicians are working to change the model. They are moving to a primary delivery model. This is not just about money, contrary to popular belief that right wing government spends more per cap on health than any other province.

During the same time BC became a have not province. Thank you NDP for killing the economy during one of the biggest booms of the last 100 years. Governments can a times be powerless to fix the economy but they sure can kill it.

Walmart has been used as an example many times. As I sated earlier many things can make an organization competitive or not. Walmart has done a good job of satisfying employees enough not to get a union unitl now in Quebec. But is the wage structure what sets them apart. 10 years ago Kmart and Walmart were even in the market. They both went with discount strategies to gain market share. Kmart has been fending off bankruptcy for over a year now. What was the big difference. Walmart has one of the best warehousing systems in business. They keep very low inventory and are able to track and meet demand where it is needed. This process is an information system that employs some highly skilled people. It is also the biggest difference in how they were able to eat up the market share of Kmart, and in Canada Zellars. There are other challenges now. Walmart has been so successful they are now practicing monopoly like tendencies with suppliers. (e.g. exclusive access) This is not healthy for a competitive environment but unions are not the answer. Governments need to set the playing field for fair competition. By the way how much does a greeter at Walmart get paid? Everyone has assumed it starts and stays at minimum wage. Do they not get benefits when they are fulltime employees. Do they not have training and growth opportunities?

Maplesyrup, here is the first issue you can agree with Harper on. He would like a national pharmacare program. He thinks that the feds are in the best position to negotiate drug prices by buying in bulk. Woo, the NDP and the Conservatives on common ground.

walmart as it is has stated and set up programs to help employees in need. Walmarts statement of ethics that all employees are held to account on. http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/...gov/ethics1.pdf Here are the sales figures: As for the select few, that would be millions of share holders: They have even won awards for the employee management efforts. Costco has a code of ethics to but it doesn't look that well though out or promoted. http://ext.corporate-ir.net/media_files/NS...our_mission.pdf Their stock was as high as $45 in 2003 but declined for over a year and is now recovering back to $40. Their sales did increase 14% over last year Q2. So in a recovering economy both these companies are doing well. Walmart already was giant and as I eluded to can only go down, but they are still performing well. Costco looks good right now. But, if Costco were to have a major strike or with the rosy outlook had to give major contract incentives who will be left in a better market position. Sure it is not all about efficiency or productivity for people and that is why we have the government set out environmental and labour standards but as a corporation one has to look at maximizing productivity. Unions do interfere with this. As so many of you have pointed out it is common sense. You have rightly pointed out that maybe there was a reason for this interference with productivity. I have clearly stated that this interference is dated and become more of a hindrance than effective. WBC rates force managers to respect safety even if there conscious doesn't and employee opportunities in the next ten years will be on the rise so mobility, and will force managers to respect employees needs. (by 2006 only 2 employees will replace 3 leaving the workforce, by 2008 it will be 1 of 3) Here is an individual opportunity to maximize your potential and do what you want. You will need resources i.e. education, access to market (networking) and energy. In the end this is what will get a good secure income and hopefully an enjoyable work experience. As an employee I have worked in union and non union operations. I worked in two saw mills growing up, one union and the other one not. The contract negotiations and seniority were some of the differences. In the non union mill I was able to work my way around the organization and learn many jobs. In the union site I had my place and had to put in my time. I was a bouncer at a bar in BC and yes we were unionized. We were put in harms way all the time. I was also a bouncer in Alberta and we were put in harms way all the time. The big difference was the union dues ate up most of my pay check. I currently work with many organizations and I have met many good union organizers but some do nothing but work against you. The moral in union environments is not good. Go look to fortunes top companies to work for. The Box Company was at the top for a few years. They are not union but they do pay their employees well. The employees there have a since of belonging and purpose. They are will trained and respected. Is that not really what you want. Sorry for the long rant but I wanted to inject hopefully a new direction in this thread. It was becoming very circular and insulting.

Organizations have a limited amount of resources. They deploy these resources to deliver a service or produce a product. Every time resources are diverted from the organizations primary function of delivering the service or producing a product they loose efficiency. Loss of efficiency decreases productivity. Unions divert attention from production and use organizational resources thus they decrease productivity. Costco is not kicking Wall marts butt. Wall mart is the largest company in the world and has been for years now. They only have one direction to go. You mention happy union workers. Do you think wages are the only thing that make workers happy because I have met many unhappy well paid workers?

The point is mute. You don't like him and will find many things about him that bother you. The election will tell if he gets 4 more years and not you. I like this government because they are in fact doing what they said they would do. I just wish they could do it faster.

Good then don't compete based on wages. Other factors: Educated workforce Specialized workforce Resources Access to large markets Transportation routes (ships, highways, trains) Weather Government stability Tax system Justice system (clear contract law and low levels of corruption) Wages are only one factor and the example you use primarily applies to low skilled labour. We do have minimum wages. The debate may need to center around what the appropriate level should be. Unions make our companies less productive. This is one factor of competitiveness and it need not be attached to just wages. Think of the resources corporations have to spend dealing with unions. When the work you provide has higher value and is more specialized you make more money. Act like a business and market yourself. Why should you be paid more?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/12/samesex....e.ap/index.html The San Fran reversal.

Were is your proof? This took Klien 10 years with oil revenues. In BC we have a real balanced budget and the fastest growing economy in Canada. The BCLiberals have been in power for 3 years. In 4 more years we can see the real impacts.

Mr. Campbell quit drinking after the DUI.

I am not an authority on fish farming. This was a timely topic as I just saw the 1h long CBC documentary on this topic. I happened to also hear the CBC radio coverage of the recent study. I was just noting that the other side of the argument has not been represented. New measures have been taken for safety of wild stocks, for instance they remove the farmed fish when the small fries are coming out of the rivers. I was surprised to learn that the sea lice actually come from the wild fish when they come back in from deep water and they are killed when they get in fresh water. Like any other farming, techniques may be changed for health and environmental benefits. Other side:

Well Caesar, if it is common knowledge I wont question where it came from.