takeanumber

I'm pro-foreign capital. We need the capital to improve our quality of life and nation. And they get a good stable investment, with reasonable returns. I prefer a 25% debt to GDP ratio though, domestically held. But foreign capital: I'm all for it. It can only make us stronger.

You know Sully, it's so easy for the victor to say "it happened a long time ago, let's get over it." It's what an unapologetic German or Austrian says to a Jew. It's what an in-denial Turk says to an Armenian. It's what a proud Indonesian says to an East Timorese. It's what an unrepentant Japanese citizen says to a Korean. It's what an ignorant Brit says to a Chinese citizen. There can be no healing until the wrong has been acknowledged. There can be no justice until the evil is expressed. There can be no final settlement until these salves have been applied to wound, and allowed to heal. Unless the salves are applied, there can be no healing, only festering, puss-filled, infected wounds, which continue to knaw at the victim nation for years. Let's acknowledge the injustice, and move to fix it. Only then will the first nations be allowed to heal properly and emerge strong enough to take charge of their own destinies. Let's not do this in-denial bullshiat where we poo-poo the evil we've done and try portray white people (and recent immigrants) as victims. It's insulting to them, and worse, it's demeaning to every proper Canadian.

If Quebec seperates, there is an excellent chance that they will go down in flames, because they've been dependant on the Rest of Canada to subsidize their over-generous social safety net. (EI that operates under the lotto 6-42 rule, for instance). Don't expect the rest of Canada to clean it up. We'll have long moved on. We'll be good neighbors, but I think most Canadians will be relieved that the marriage is over once it's over.

I'll just say this: The current level of social services in Quebec cannot be supported without the help of the rest of Canada. We call these 'transfers', but in reality, it's merely subsidization of the Quebec socialist system. If Quebec seperates, it will quickly devolve into an Argentine quagmire. If Quebec then tries to vote its way back into Confederation, don't expect Canada to vote to allow them in. The Rest of Canada will have long since reformed their Senate, their Constitution, and will have then become a sovereign people -- without Quebec. To ammend the Constitution to allow Quebec back in would not be possible. And what of Rural Quebec with its rapidly aging population? Tough Titty said the Kitty when the Milk Ran Dry. Should Quebec be able to make it on its own, without subsidization, it will come with the heavy price of cutting social programs. If Quebeckers don't agree on this point, then they're simply not rational.

What's wrong with letting first nations determine their own fate within Canada? @Hawk: Your attitude towards the first nations is very typical of a recent immigrant. If you're not a recent immigrant, than its worse, because the source of your ignorance isn't naivity inasmuch as it's bigotry. I suggest you take a look at how we've treated our aboriginal allies after past wars -- you know -- get educated about Canadian history, and then come back to this thread and comment. Your statements so far suggest that you're merely ignorant, and not a bigot.

It's their water and their land. Next time stand by your treaties instead of trying to rewrite them all the time. Better yet, next time, instead of stealing ppl's lands without treaties, you might want to try drawing up a few. Plus, better to have them fish. That way they don't have to move away from their reserve, and they can be employed.

It's Tory-ism at its worst.

MS: That just confirms what we already knew about Harper and Day. They're bent over while getting rammed by the Americans from behind.

I really wish they didn't.

The gong show that is BC Politics. Here's a tip for the voters: This time, try not to elect a drunkard.

I hope that was sarcasm. Almost like that woman who beat Virk to death is a 'victim' too. Enough with the victimization.

No. And they better not be laughing.

If Caeser thinks it's alright for people to cage their kids 'out of fear', then somebody call child services. Sometimes, the illiberal bone in my body says that you should have a liscence to have kids because of sick people like that. But then my libearal bones say, "no, no, everybody can try to have kids and try parenting". But seriously Caeser. Those are some pretty sick beliefs you got there.

So...what set of conditions justifies sexual humilation and caging of another human being? I'm hard pressed to think of a single condition, little though a set.

Incidents like this proove just how far new brunswick has to come in terms of basic morals and values. A guidedog is like a wheelchair. You don't get kicked out of the library for having a noisy electric chair. It's just insane.

I'm pretty sure that that breaks the law. lol. UNB has egg on its face.

Nope. The system is different in each province. I'm not sure in Ontario, but I think it goes: 1. people apply to the committee made up of community members, judges, etc. 2. they widdle down the applicants to a short list. 3. The solicitor general of the province chooses who's going to be a judge from that list. It varies. Ah, appeal courts and whatnot, they work in a similar fashion. So it's not entirely the government. It just gets complicated depending on the court and jurisdiction etc. But yeh. Not entirely the government in most cases.

50 years woulda been more appropriate. And to be locked in a cage for a good measure. I'm outraged by the judges decision and I'd like to know if the crown is going to appeal. The Crown should appeal. The sentence was WEAK!

I won't attempt to explain. I understand that stats and things like factor analysis are hard, which is why I just don't bother.

So you know how to use Google. Do you want a banana? Seriously. I've been doing research in the field for years. You got an outmoded source.

So then, why should we be subsidizing their lifestyle. And, if we're at our maximum food production, then wouldn't the market reflect that? Too many firms are in the industry. Time to stop subsidizing lifestyles.

Easy. With greater economies of scale, fewer farmers will produce more food. Witness the past 125 years in Canada, where, thanks to economies of scale and technology, there are millions of fewer farmers producing far, far, far more food. It's intermediate economics, the LRAC curve, but I'm sure you know about it.

My predicted numbers are under "A conjecture about the polls". As for the median voter theory, it's not just one issue. You can load hundreds of different factors and collapse them down into one dimensional, two dimensions, or go Euclidean n-space and use 100 dimensions. It's a theory that's very applicable to Canada.

The money is there for all sorts of events. Gay pride parades are terrific events for inner city neighborhoods and boost those communities. What do you have against communities?

I think Campbell has far more to hide than he's letting on.