dre

Here's a bit of history about the "jewish state" demand. It has never been a pre-requisite to peace until 2007. In fact before then it was never even MENTIONED by Israel in negotiations with ANY of its Arab neighbors, including Egypt and Jordan. Its just a blatant attempt to make a two state solution even less possible, and to make sure Conflict: Dirtfarm Holyland continues as per status quo.

You're setting up an impossible scenario... It makes no difference if Palestinians recognize a jewish state, or if Israelis recognize a palestinian muslim state. What is important is that they simply recognize each other as nations with borders and respect those borders.

Yes things like hydroponics could sustain a tiny population. But that will not compensate for the fact that traditional farming and organic growth that have kept both humans and livestock alive for thousands of years will not be possible in another 60 at the current rate. All the dirt will be gone, and it will take thousands of years for it to return. Heres an interesting article about it. SE is 10 thousand times the threat that terrorism, or global warming will ever be, yet most people have not even heard of it. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/only-60-years-of-farming-left-if-soil-degradation-continues/ The could be our "near extinction" event.

Population will be controlled naturally. I predict that by the end of this century there will only be about 1/2 a billion people left. And the real killer is not something people even talk about. Within the next hundred years there will be no farming, and no crops because we will run out of dirt about 60 years from now.

Reverting to a posture of economic isolationism with china is not in the cards. This ship sailed about 30 years ago. Investigating political interference, sounds nice...the problem whoever did the investigating would be people that are in on all this. It would be like expecting the fox to fix the holes in your chicken coup. He wont do a very good job because he likes the holes and wants to eat the chickens.

Yes I'm talking about foreign doctors who come here and pass our exams... and still cant practice. Again... there's about 10 thousand such doctors in Canada right now, and again these doctors all passed or in some cases aced our medical exams.

Incorrect. Thousands of doctors PASS our medical exams and still wait years for residency, many eventually just give up. The doctor shortage is manufactured by doctors to drive up their own wages.

The whole public vs private aspect of the healthcare debate is really besides the point. You could have a good system using either or both. The real problems with our medical system.... 1. Conflict of interest / Protectionism Trade unions masquerading as associates, not only negotiate doctors salaries with each province, but they control much of the certification/standards regime. This is a blatant conflict of interest, and these organizations have an intrinsic interest in create artificial scarcity because it improves their negotiating position with the provinces. We have a chronic shortage a family doctors even though there are hundreds/thousands of doctors that have passed our medical exams. They are simply prevented from practicing. 3. Our proximity to the US We are a tiny market next to a large market, that has a system specifically designed to price-gouge patients to enrich investors and doctors. This drives up costs. 3. Trade Policy / Globalism This is probably the biggest one. Most workers face competition in some way from foreigners in developing markets. Their wages are pretty much stagnant. People like doctors and teachers though face much less competition due not only to successful and organized attempts to protect themselves from competition, but from logistics as well. The result is that the people facing competition, are having a harder and harder time buying services from the people that don't. Medical services, and education are increasing in cost from 5 to 10% annually because of this. Juggling around who the "payer" is (public or private) will do nothing to fix any of this. Costs in markets that use both methods are escalating. Everywhere. Wanna fix it? Flood the market with doctors. Theres 10's of thousands of good doctors around the world that would love to practice in Canada for 100k. Identify them, and fast track accreditation, and certification. Force our doctors to compete with them. Castrate the medical associations, and make it so the organizations that negotiate wages and salaries, are totally separate from the ones that control standards and certification. Fund more residency slots so that all the doctors that ARE here working.

I dont have all the answers. But I do know, that while the problem is worse muslim households right now, patriarchy is not a muslim problem. Millions of woman live in male dominated homes, and are subject to abuse, pressure, etc. I guess women need to keep fighting for equality, and we should help them in any way we can. Support structures, education, laws, etc.

I would support efforts to empower muslim women to make whatever personal choices they want, and to join us in shrugging off patriarchy.

If womens rights is an issue here the answer is definitely not to use the state as fassion policy and ban them from wearing certain garments. Instead we should spend that money on education, and empowering muslim women.

Again... mind boggling. This is basic k-12 math... those lists represent a sample that is so small its completely useless to draw conclusions from. All you have shown is that you are not equipped to provide useful commentary on this issue. Even if those lists were 100% immigrants it would indicate nothing about the crime and immigrant population as a whole, and you should have known why in about Grade 9.

The link between changes in tax policy and economic growth is tenuous based on the data available... even non-existant. GNP growth is not correlated with shifts in tax policy at all, in fact some of the strongest growth in GNP has happened during periods of high taxation. Year Real GDP growth Effective rate on capital income Statutory rate 1947 -0.9% 38.0% 1948 4.3% 38.0% 1949 -0.5% 38.0% 1950 8.4% 42.0% 1951 7.5% 50.8% 1952 3.8% 52.0% 1953 4.5% 52.0% 1954 -0.6% 58.0% 52.0% 1955 7.0% 44.0% 52.0% 1956 2.0% 46.0% 52.0% 1957 2.0% 48.0% 52.0% 1958 -0.9% 47.0% 52.0% 1959 6.9% 45.0% 52.0% 1960 2.4% 42.0% 52.0% 1961 2.3% 42.0% 52.0% 1962 5.9% 35.0% 52.0% 1963 4.3% 34.0% 52.0% 1964 5.6% 31.0% 50.0% 1965 6.2% 29.0% 48.0% 1966 6.3% 30.0% 52.8% 1967 2.5% 33.0% 52.8% 1968 4.7% 37.0% 52.8% 1969 3.1% 45.0% 52.8% 1970 0.2% 42.0% 49.2% 1971 3.3% 38.0% 48.0% 1972 5.2% 38.0% 48.0% 1973 5.6% 38.0% 48.0% 1974 -0.6% 42.0% 48.0% 1975 -0.2% 44.0% 48.0% 1976 5.2% 40.0% 48.0% 1977 4.5% 40.0% 48.0% 1978 5.4% 46.0% 48.0% 1979 3.1% 45.0% 46.0% 1980 -0.3% 48.0% 46.0% 1981 2.5% 38.0% 46.0% 1982 -2.0% 35.0% 46.0% 1983 4.4% 34.0% 46.0% 1984 6.9% 33.0% 46.0% 1985 4.1% 33.0% 46.0% 1986 3.4% 33.0% 46.0% 1987 3.1% 33.0% 40.0% 1988 4.0% 33.0% 34.0% 1989 3.5% 33.0% 34.0% 1990 1.9% 31.0% 34.0% 1991 -0.2% 30.0% 34.0% 1992 3.3% 30.0% 34.0% 1993 2.8% 31.0% 35.0% 1994 4.0% 30.0% 35.0% 1995 2.5% 31.0% 35.0% 1996 3.7% 31.0% 35.0% 1997 4.4% 31.0% 35.0% 1998 4.3% 30.0% 35.0% 1999 4.7% 30.0% 35.0% 2000 4.1% 31.0% 35.0% 2001 1.1% 30.0% 35.0% 2002 1.8% 29.0% 35.0% 2003 2.5% 23.0% 35.0% 2004 3.4% 26.0% 35.0% 2005 3.0% 30.0% 35.0% 2006 2.6% 35.0% 2007 1.9% 35.0% 2008 -0.3% 35.0% 2009 -3.5% 35.0% 2010 3.0% 35.0%

The medical associations should be castrated anyways. They are behind most of our healthcare woes.

I don't think you can "fix" it though. Change will come once the fact we are really an oligarchy becomes so blatant that we burn it all to the ground and start again from scratch. Unfortunately that will take a while, because they are able to keep the illusion that the system works for "the people" by borrowing vast sums of money from people that are not even alive yet.

We have been had. Its the citizens that are supposed to keep the government honest, but we have bought their little left vs right charade hook line and sinker. No matter what any government does now we will just be partisan hacks like the guy that started this thread and most of the other people here. Died in the wool partisans (both liberal and conservative) would still stand by their parties and leaders even if they got caught red handed in high def video ass raping a small child. They would say "ya but so and so is worse"... or "the source of the ass raping video is not credible). Its pretty awesome if you think about. Philosophers have been trying to figure out how to game democracy for hundreds of years... they finally figured out all they had to do was trump up fake enemies and turn us against each other by convincing us that ideology and the retarded culture war are whats important. We get exactly the kind of government we deserve, and to be honest its great to see us starting to get punished for our stupidity. Sometimes pain is the only way to learn. Last laugh will be on them though... because once corrupt career politicians and their financial and industrial elite buddies have finished stealing everything, they will get dragged from their estates and cut into little pieces.

I think the likelyhood of such a strike is extremely low. What much more likely is that they want nukes to make sure they don't get sacked like fellow "axis of evil" member, Iraq did.

I challenge your entire claim? "Most Commercials" ???? Oh jesus... just never mind.

Your examples show nothing at all. It boggles the mind that any educated adult would use top x lists as evidence to make assertions about a large population.

The US should have fought WW1 and WW2, they just shouldn't have waited so long. The cold war was a colossal waste, and both the Russians and Americans are too blame. They only fought to liberate Kuwait after they green lighted Sadams invasion. In Kosovo they actually liberated a terrorist army (the KLA) They help and sponsor fascist regimes, dictatorships, autocracies, etc. The war on Terror has been by all objective measures a massive failure. The US has funded China's military buildup, by being its biggest customer. At the end of the day, while there's no question that the US has been a hugely positive influence on the world, it is mostly through the development and export of life improving technologies. Its military adventures are at BEST a mixed bag.

Yes, his knowledge of a small group of immigrants is anecdotal... but so is this entire thread. And you are absolutely the last person to point fingers over this kind of thing. Christ... I just read a thread where you were using "top ten most wanted" lists to support your assertion that immigrants increase crime rates. You are CAPTAIN anecdote.

You have to look at the immigration population as a whole... and not wretch and jerk at the knees over what is probably anecdote. I have never seen any information showing that immigrants commit murder or other violent crimes at a higher rate than the general population. And overall the murder rate is falling regardless of immigration policy. That's not a reason to not strengthen the screening process, but policy should not be formulated based on reactionism from irrational people like you. Spending on ANYTHING that's meant to keep us "safe" is basic risk management. Insurance adjusters should decide where money gets spent... people that understand risk management. Otherwise we will misallocate funds like the trillions spent on the counter-productive GWOT. You have done precisely nothing to show the screening process is deficient.

No, that's just flat out false. The goal was forced assimilation, and forcing natives to act "white". Sir John A Macdonald... And John A Macdonald again... And Duncan Scott, minister of Indian affairs... 1910. The last quote illustrates the silliness of your claim. The government of Canada knew full well that it was destroying the lives of many natives they just didnt care. They wanted a final solution to the Indian problem. They wanted to eradicate their culture, and make them act white, plain and simple. It had nothing at all to do with helping natives or native children.

"The liberal press" ROFLMAO

Problem with that is that if you want open and free markets, consumer ethics is the only real regulation. So you reward the practices of those you patronize. Would you buy a shirt from a pedophile instead of someone else because its a buck cheaper? Trade should be used as a foreign policy tool... its really the only card the western world has left to play. If everyone thought like that we would have lost the cold war because we would have made the USSR filthy rich buying cheap stuff made by slaves in gulags.