Machjo

Again, it's not just Canada vs. the US. It's the US vs. everyone. We now have allies. That said, you're right, Canada has to accept some blame for this too and I hope it learns its lesson. But right now, we.re at war.

Er... yeah, that's the nature of war. I'm not pretending Canada will come out of this unscathed. If it was just us and them, the US would have the upper hand. But this war is the US vs everyone. The US is fighting a multifront war. With that, our countries combined can maje the US really feel the pinch. Canada will hurt too. That's inevitable now.

We should not be holding punches in a trade war.

I remember reading that US citizens are the most common overstayers. But that's not my motive for this proposal. My motive is to apply the Art of the Deal, the only thing Trump understands.

Canada's no Angel, granted. Dancing, telecom restrictions, supply management needed to go long ago and that Canada study to such anachronisms irritate me. Those policies hurt us more than the US. They do not excuse Trump's behaviour. And remember, this is Trump against everyone not just Canada. We can go back to normal relations once Trump is out. We're now at war.

It's not just Canada though. The EU and Mexico have been hit too. Many Americans visit the EU and Mexico each year. Sure Trump could,retaliate, but only bilaterally, meaning Canadians could still visit Mexico and the EU visa-free, but not Americans. Remember, this is Trump against everybody. We can go back to friendly relations once Trump is out of office. We're now in a trade war.

We need to apply pressure in these negotiations. Remember that it's bot the US vs. Canada but the US vs everyone. With that, the US can retaliate against everyone, but we'll still be able ti travel visa-freedom other States. Americans won't. Not good for business.

https://www.ncpg.org.sg/en/Pages/DealWithProblemGambling.aspx?categ=4&article=40# The following individuals will be automatically excluded by law from all casinos in Singapore unless proof of change in circumstance has been provided: Undischarged bankrupts Those receiving financial aid from the Government Those who live in subsidised rental flats and have more than 6 months of HDB arrears Those receiving Legal Aid Seems reasonable to me. What are your thoughts on something like this?

If Canada really wants to make the US feel the pinch, I don't think import tariffs are the solution. Instead, I think export tariffs are the way to go. I'd impose the following export tariffs on the US: 1. a 25% tariff on Canadian steel exports to the US. It doesn't seem the US wants our steel anyway and, if we must pay a tariff, Id rather the Canadian government collect at least half of it. 2. A 10% tariff on Canadian aluminium exports to the US for the same reason as above. 3. A 1/3 tariff on the export of Canadian non-renewable resources, animal products and byproducts, tobacco, and alcohol. The above tariffs would shift the pain of a trade war to Canadian producers and US consumers rather than on Canadian consumers and US producers as is the case with import tariffs.

Historically, some closed states established 'free ports' (or what we might call 'free economic zones' today). Essentially, the free port was wide open, allowing free trade and unrestricted free movement of people. Outside of that was a no-go zone for foreign nationals. I suppose we might be able to bring that concept back and so make all sides happy. For example, Canada could declare its port cities Free Economic Zones or FEZ's, but then restrict movement outside of those zones. It could be an idea worth considering.

What was wrong with the attempted cultural genocide of the indigenous peoples?

The government should impose only one culture, and that's official culture. Examples: 1. I might address a government employee in an official language, but speak whatever language I want in all unofficial contexts. 2. I might pay staff holiday pay on Christmas ir Easter day, but still have no obligation to celebrate it. 3. I won't burn down a separate Catholic school, but might still write to my politician asking him to abrogate the separate school system. 4. I won't assassinate an abortionist, but still reserve the right to believe that life begins at conception. 5. I will respect homosexuals but still disagree with homosexual acts. 6. I'll respect immigration laws even though I'm a world federalist. 7. I won't evade taxes to fund the CBC but will still watch films in an unofficial language online if I want to and no one will force me to watch Canadian content. I'm sure there are plenty more examples. In short, if I obey the law, then I'm conforming to the official culture even though I have my own culture too.

Many Ontarians steal Torontonians' jobs too. It's time for the City of toronto to put its foot down, create a municipal ID card, and if you don't have it, you can't work there. Seriously, bloody Leitches.

Many Quebecers move to Ontario and steal Ontarians' jobs. I think it's time we create provincial ID cards and if you want to work in my province, you get the card. You don't get the card, then find work in anothr province you bloody Leitch.

So now we'll start requiring immigrants to learn Ojibwa? Even I can't speak much Ojibwa and I trace my roots back to New France. It's like we're asking immigrants to be more Canadian than Canadians.

Now I know that I know that in some states, a woman cannot obtain an abortion without the father's explicit consent. If we think that is too harsh, then at least make it a requirement that the woman did not sexually coerce a man into sex or unprotected sex at least within the last ninety days. That would be easy. The abortionist would just need to contact the police to confirm that no one has filed any rape report against her in the last ninety days. Done.

In Germany, a male rapist can choose chemical castration as an alternative to imprisonment. The rules are strict. Two physicians must confirm that he understands what chemical castration is, what it does, and that he has freely consented to it. Though some SJWs have argued that that is manipulative since if the convict refuses castration, he faces many years in prison, the German government has countered that at least it gives him the option since in other states he would have no choice but to serve all those years in prison. So if anything, the German model is kinder than other models.

I'm pro-life so I admit that can skew my view on that front.

Stats for pregnancies I don't have. But as for individual cases, I do remember of at least two cases in the media. One teacher who got pregnant by her student in a case of statutory rape. She kept and delivered the baby in the end, I know of one other case where the man tried in civil court to prevent his attacker from having an abortion, but I believed that failed too and she did get an abortion if I understand.

“43% of high school boys and young college men reported they had an unwanted sexual experience and of those, 95% said a female acquaintance was the aggressor.” http://equalitycanada.com/why-are-so-many-women-raping-boys-research-into-female-perpetrated-sexual-violence/

After extra thought, I agree.

If you check the stats, female sexual assault if makes is more common than many realise. Furthermore, anyone with a penis knows it has a mind if its own. Women do get orgasms when raped in some cases and that makes it worse mentally since it can contribute to feelings of guilt even though it was a natural bodily response. The same applies to a man. If a man sees a naked woman straddling him, he probably will get erect whether he wants to or not, and it might not take much stroking to reach orgasm.

True. And even if we did grant the mother's right to abort under normal circumstances, how could we countenance it in the case of sexual assault without the consent if the victim without her victimising the victim yet again?

Then another question. Should she choose to keep the baby, should he have the right to claim sole custody and make her pay child support if that is what he wants?