Shwa

How so? I mean, what are you basing your comment on?

Mr. Canada, now look what you have done! You have taken a perfectly good thread and ruined it for everyone. That is not very nice and it ticks us off. You should knock it off now. Thanks!

My oldest just got his engineering degree from a well known Canadian engineering university. He basically paid for it himself, he has debt, but he'll manage. My youngest will graduate from high school within the next year or two. I have a bunch in between. I went to a typical public school and a typical high school back in the day. Class sizes really haven't changed much. It is still around 20-30 for most classes as it was when I went to school and through the school years of my kids. Schools are being closed in our city and amalgamated, but it is to address the demographics of the neighbourhood more than anything else. I live in a older neighbourhood so there are less school aged children and it doesn't make sense to keep a school - that was designed for 1200 kids - open for 400. My kids high school offers vocational training, music and athletics (I am a volunteer coach for one of their teams). There doesn't seem to be any less than when I went to school. It is all more or less the same. Our team has a decent budget to afford what we need to play. There are some differences of course. Students today have access to far more information than we ever did and some of their learning is geared toward how to successfully access this information to solve problems. I see people in my workplace struggle with the information age, where the next generation takes it in stride. They plug in their iPod, fire up the laptop and type away while the TV is on and the phone is at their side. I also don't see any less money coming into the education system, but I do see it allotted differently. There seems to be more money put into the local boards adminstrative complex, more padding of the board bureaucracy and dealing with some questionable wage increases. It seems to me that maintaining school service levels while building the castles has actually increased the amount of money being alloted to the local public education system. But I am not sure if this is typical everywhere.

Take your pick: http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2009/fortune/0907/gallery.G500_money_losers_fortune.fortune/ http://www.usatoday.com/money/jobcenter/workplace/rules/2002-11-08-corporate-bureaucracy_x.htm http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/dec/05/acting-chief-attacks-corporate-bureaucracy/ Or... make a complaint to Bell or Rogers. See all of the above or research some on your own. Indicate what is so? I didn't say that the "government was increasing in efficiency" nor that the "MBAs were behind it." What I did say is that private big businesses run more efficiently than government ones is a false notion. So you'll need to clarify as to what you want indicated.

Aye, there's the rub. It might be worthwhile to consider the hunter/gatherer from time to time, but outside of the confines of Hobbes.

For those that could afford the risk in the stock market you mean? And not including those whose incomes and businesses were wiped out in the past few years. Ah, so you do agree that the amount of garbage produced is an indicator of prosperity.

Yet from the same article we have: So when does the prosperity part come for those 923 millions? Or is this cold comfort that the statistical group to which they belong has halved over the past 40 years? And let's not forget that obesity - another form of malnutrition - is on the rise in the US: CDC Trends on Overweight and Obesity Has prosperity arrived for these people? And you must be careful of cultural relativism. This is why I gave you the thought experiment because we need to be certain of the values - to the best of our ability - of what we are trying to calculate. And some of those values could be completely foreign to us, but that certainly does not make them irrelevant. Is this also true for peasant China or India? Is it true for the refugee camps in Darfur? How about the career choices or out-of-the-closet coming for the drought ridden areas of Africa today? The point I am trying to make is that which kimmie made: This seems to be more realistic and no, the future isn't a given. I get the sense that you are a positive and forward thinking person and that is a very good thing. But kimmie is right and is likely 'right' for the greater portion of our North American or global population. So saying that there are some subject historical trends might be positive and forward thinking, it will hardly do in face of the avalanche of information that shows 'historically' the concept of 'prosperity' is subject to peaks and valleys and to a goodly portion of the people subjected to those trends, those valleys can go pretty damned deep.

Use the icons too: I really loved your cake. I just loved your cake. BTW there bloodyminded, I found this comment: ...to be hilarious. I was going to post something about Mr. Canada proudly wearing his red and white super hero suit with maple leaf on the chest, but I thought that might be a little over the top.

Hmmmm. I am thinking you have made a bit of a snap reply that reveals a cultural centrism of sorts. You can't really be faulted, but I did provide a thought experiment. Firstly, I am not sure how one would factor 'media channels' as any real indicator of prosperity. Whenever someone vaunts about our richness in media I am often reminded about the line, '500 channels and nothing on.' Do you consider the amount of garbage produced to be an indicator of prosperity? If not, then how do you arrive at the conclusion that this historical improvement pertains to 'everyone, everywhere?" I mean, I haven't done extensive research, but what I have seen indicates that the only people who proclaim such a universal are those that have some investment in the controlling mechanisms for that particular point of view (victors = history) without actually considering the counterpoint. Birth & death rates? Conflict levels? Poverty levels or percentages? Demographics of wealth and health? You do say that there are "far more choices," but what does this really mean and can you qualify this in any meaningful way that takes into account any cultural relativist views that you may hold? Even if we limit the discussion to North America, any prosperity gained over the past couple of hundred of years was at the expense of some pretty large segments of the population. Like I said somewhere else, we have larger houses to hold more crap, but does that truly indicate prosperity and if it does, should it?

Hmmm. Then I have to ask for whom and when? And while we're at it, where? Add to the mix that 'history is written by the victors' I am sure a comprehensive history from perspective of the poor over the ages would compound the problem of answering that. You can quote Marx if you like. I often wonder through a little thought experiment: who is more prosperous? A hunter-gather deep in some isolated, but abundant forest or an executive in the middle of a upper middle class burb? So I don't really think the post-WWII generations "had it easy" per se, but they have deffo had it excessive. And sometimes excessive isn't easy if you know what I mean.

This is illustrative of a really interesting concept - that private big businesses are run more efficiently than government ones. This is a persistent notion even though we have seen plenty of evidence of it being patently false. Nevermind the big multi-national corporations and financial institutions that have been bailed out by billions of tax dollars in the past year, or the big natural resource companies that have sputtered and failed over the years, draining government money along the way or the supplemental monies paid to other corporations through tax breaks, grants, contracts, etc., there is this idea that big business does not incorporate an internal bureaucracy when it most certainly does. The funny part is that people who want privatization of government services don't realize that most government departments are run like private corporations these days anyway, complete with MBA oriented management, current industry practices and procedures and the same sort of profit-reward system for executives. If you are frustrated by the inefficiency in government services today, it is because of this private corporate orientation. Privatization will only make things worse and more expensive. Yes we still hear this mantra repeated over and over and over, even in the face of obvious evidence to the contrary.

My apologies. I should have said big, steaming pile of bull manure. Otherwise I believe my statement to be factually correct. And here's why: Again you are conveniently ignoring a huge chunk of history in practically every single region of the world, but especially the Americas. Guatemala - 99% Christian El Salvador - 80%-ish Christian Nicaragua - 80% Christian Now in the above conflicts, lets not forget the complict involvement of the US - 78% Christian Just in those three examples above, your love-of-peace filter is a sick delusion. According to what standard? According to my standard there is "grinding poverty" in the US too. According to the standards of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops some 37 million Americans "live in a state of poverty, hunger and hardship." So what I am saying, I mean, what I am trying to get across is that your sh*t stinks too. If you want examples of terrorism, then maybe you ought to dig a little deeper into all the terror, murder, rape, violence and destruction caused by American "interests" in the Latin America over the past 5 decades. Love of peace indeed. Are you kidding me?

Actually Machjo, your suggestions are pretty good. I think we'll see more toll roads in the GTA n the next 10 years, like the toll state highway system currently in place in NY. I don't mind paying tolls for a nice ride on a decent highway and from Buffalo to Rochester was only a couple of bucks. Toll roads, while I am sure not totally tax independent, add revenue for upkeep, reduce wear and tear on vehicles and can actually slow traffic down and critical points. So there really doesn't have to be any new taxes, just tolls. And keep the toll collecting firmly in government hands. The federal government already has a regional approach to bilingualism and it is mostly a fair deal. Upper managers have to be bilingual when they will have French or English staff. Since the service model behind much of the federal public services is going virtual through call centres, this increases the need for bilingual staff. The big problem with the federal government is that they are centralizing. Before they used to operate many offices in many regions and now all those offices are being pulled back to a virtual Ottawa or being centralized in one or two locations. Now this might save you some tax money (when was the last time the feds significantly lowered your taxes?) but a decentralized service model allows for far more federal spending in a region than the current trend. Local federal offices will tend to employ local people who will spend their income locally and provide other service and projects with a local focus. On the education front: Any positive suggestions for the current boards in Ontario are welcome! Currently all I see is education bureaucrats empire building at the expense of schools, curriculum and ultimately the students. I am not sure what the voucher system is, but there seems to be a trend in the GTA towards brand new large multi-milion dollar 'board offices' when schools are closing or falling into to disrepair.

First time I have ever heard of the Haida being notorious for their argumentative domineering-ness. But whatever. They got the archipelago renamed to what they wanted so I guess it serves them pretty well. They should be lawyers.

You are spouting unsustainable idealism now. If you seek tax exemption from the pick-and-choose things you do not like there is a word for that: emigrate. This way, you won't have to worry about how the taxes are spent in Canada, your province or your municipality. Now this appears as a contradiction to your pick-and-choose-tax-exemption comment above. Now this appears as a contradiction to your locals-pay-through-their-taxes comment above. This reminds me of a quote from The Simpsons: Kang (in Bill Clinton form): We must move forward... not backwards, not to the side, not forwards, but always whirling, whirling, whirling towards freedom.

"while those who are not interested in them still have to foot part of the bill." Hardly. Torontonians pay taxes, they get the benefits of those taxes. But in fact, the PAN-AM Games will go on over a large portion of the GTA, so the GTA benefits. There are millions of tax payers here. They are benefitting from their slice of the tax pie AND paying billions into funds that are dispersed all over the province and the rest of the country for things like health & enducation. The PAN-AM games were held in Winnipeg in 1967 & 1999. The Commonwealth Games have been held in Hamilton, Vancouver, Edmonton, & Victoria. There are plenty of places in Canada that enjoy international games and competitions and the economic benefits they may bring. You idea of wealth redistribution already happens, but making sure everyone gets an exact equal amount is a bit of a stretch as much as your idea that the ROC is footing the bill.

Of course there is going to be government funding, like every other international sporting event in Canada. What would you expect?

This is very interesting. I am sure I have read something about a trinity concept in ancient Sumerian cosmology, but I can't remember where. When I get a chance, I'll see if anything pops up on EBSCO. It would be interesting to see if these triforms appear in other ancient myths, texts or symbols in the same region and compare those percentages to other regions and see if there is anything like a universal at work. As for veneration of the saints, that could be an easy adaptation from ancestor worship cults (Our Father...) which appear in many cultures in almost every corner of the planet. Which probably makes that concept an easy sell to transmitting these ideas to other cultures I would think.

PAN-AM games are "free market." You have to make a "bid" on hosting them. All kinds of international competition inspire youngsters to become involved in sports, even the PAN-AM games which many athletes use a proving ground for the Olympics.

How ironic. That is, using the word 'zealot.' Why say "that particular religion" when your statement is true for zealots of all particular religions?

While trying to maintain a sense of decorum, I must submit that your statement here is a big, steaming pile of bullsh*t. A. What is true for Islam re: violent and tribal cultures is just as true for Judaism and Christianity. B. That Islam has "done nothing to improve" ignores a great chunk of history (eg. see "Dark Ages") and ignores all the violence and murder perpetrated under the watchful eyes of Jews and Christians up to and including modern times. C. "Levels of civilization" are not determined or measured by religion. D. Saying the "...Islamic world is characterized by violence, ignorance and grinding poverty." is completely untrue. The "Islamic world" is present in many nations all over the planet, most of them wealthy, enlightened and peaceful nations at that. The only reason I can possibly think of for someone posting that kind of intense level of bullsh*t is because they live with such an over-abundance of fear they feel the need to spread it around because, you know, misery loves company. Its the Global Village man, move past the fear or stay in your hut and shut up about it.

Be careful there TrueMetis or you'll end up trapped in semantical quicksand. MLS182 has provided his/her definition of "god/God" as "just energy" and "the universe." Thus the definition has changed. You are arguing based on an old definition and so the ball is still in your court. Question for MLS182: when you say "god is just energy" do you mean "just" in the moral sense like 'justice' or in the limiting sense like 'only?'

No. We are atoms on the atomic level. On the sub-atomic level we are just particles and waves. On the post-modern sub-atomic level we are simply mute pixels on a screen.

Really? Then no more world mens hockey championships, junior or women because they already have hockey in the Olympics. No more world championship in any sport because if it isn't in the Olympics it won't inspire youngsters anyway. Why bother with the Grey Cup, Superbowl or World Series because, you know, it isn't the Olympics.