Shwa

$25k, that's it? What's all the fuss? Of course large corporations never spend advertising money targeting existing customers, on brand loyalty and on spreading the news on the 'new and improved' product line. Right? They do? Oh.... Damned TTC and their modern business practices!

In other words, would you consider the lists just a list of probabilities? It's social science, where the target is barn-door wide, nothing more.

Let's apply your own sentiment to this statement: You believe that "is a North American (Canadian/American)Problem" so do you have to some relevant Canadian data you can cite to show how this is - or could be - a North American problem? Because you can't sit back and say "it's much easier" when there could be some very different values resulting is some very different outcomes. Eh?

If man were "born free" what's with the umbilical cord? Scrap all that crap and go straight for Bertrand Russell's 'A History of Western Philosophy.'

You may be biased? .... Oh, I see now... If you don't get caught at breaking the law, does this constitute "less State?" For example, there are places and situations, I am sure, where you can get away with minimal state intervention in your life, where they cannot force you to comply (because "they" won't have a clue what you are up to) where you can be a nanny-free responsible adult. Paternalism isn't needed, just a little isolationism. A little nation-within-a-nation, unto yourself, complete with all the requisite Hobbsian notions of uniform law and order for all. The problem being, of course, is that society is not at all - and never will be uniform - and that practically everything one does affects another. Or maybe you need to revise your list of examples and perhaps solidify what you mean by "individual rationality and liberty."

Really, trolling? So are you of the opinion that alcohol - and the damage from alcohol use and abuse - is not comparable to crack, smack or coke? Or from you, as one of your many side jobs...

Or when a kid dies from alcholol poisoning due to the booze they bought at the Liquor Store; or as the result of a DUI crash. Etc. Morality via montage, one of my favourite devices. Really makes one think.

Thanks for clarifying that. I am sure some of the worst, most vicious dope dealers also have similar excuses. Can't really buy houses, cars and other desirable bling on a welfare salary. The enterprising dope dealer has the potential for all these things and more. Vacations, private schools for the kiddies, capital investments for retirement funds. "Capitalism is the legitimate racket of the ruling class." - Al Capone

Sure, but robbing liquor stores and gas stations doesn't give you a client base. A good solid understanding of the demographic is the key and great service means not only will existing clients comes back, but they will likley bring in more clients.

Maybe. But it's a way for an enterprising kid to make quick money in neighbourhoods that have high unemployment. So I see your drug dealing and raise you unemployment.

Is this all relevant to Canada or do you have statistics and videos and stuff relating to Canada too?

'Assisted living' programs for racoons.

Talent goes where corporate profits are most likely to be gained based on business decisions and celebrity. The "leftist" has nothing to do with it.

Hey what school are you going to? I grew up in QC, in an Anglo school whose French courses were all Parisian or 'proper' French. Sort of like when I took English classes in Ontario, it was 'proper' English and not Cockney. I would suggest that you learn Parisien French, then go to Quebec and listen and learn. There are several dialects in Quebec and some common slang. However, if you can speak the language - even rudimentary conversational Parisien, Quebeckers will fill you in on the rest.

Well there is a method to their madnessnd Harm Reduction is one way of dealing with the rest of the madness. The Canadian Harm Reduction Network Here is a link to the Vancouver pilot project to distribute free crack pipes. And this... Maybe next time you should actually provide a link to the story after having read it some so you have an idea of the issue.

No, the designation is, to use your logic of definition, Metis, Inuit and then the other ones...

The faith I have is provided by the historical evidence combined with the current high standard of living and relative freedoms we currently enjoy here. Including the immigration policies over the years. Do you have some other evidence that I should look at that would call this faith into question? Something in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that I missed that has caused this positive myopia I suffer from? Exactly, which is what I was trying to get at earlier. What models do you have that are more accurate and mechanically sound that those that are employed by those elected and those hired to manage that for us? That is the context I am approaching from. It seems that you have some special information that leads to a certain conclusion, but that politicians, by their very nature, are exempt from seeing or using. I don't get that. Your confused. I didn't say it was a true statement, just a convincing argument that mulitculturalism is a good thing to the majority. One need not be truthful to be convincing right? However, in our current case, multiculturalism seems to be working out in the large of it. Do you have a broad argument that can show that it doesn't or the counter argument - just as convincing - that multiculturalism isn't a good thing? If you do, I'd love to hear it. At least we are in agreement with the thread.

It does? "First Nations" are included within the definition of "Aboriginal." The term "First" is not a descriptor of "Aboriginal," but rather "Nations."

My mistake, I thought any OECD study would do. I found a bunch when I did a Google search, I just thought you would want the condensed version. Do they have to be specifically Hardner endorsed OECD studies or would the canon of OECD education data, located here do?

Why do you automatically presume that the designation is based on "good enough?"

Perhaps. Or more like saying, Nigerians, Haitians and Jamaicans.

Try this link. Ha, ha. Just kidding! Start here: World education rankings: which country does best at reading, maths and science?

This is what I am getting at, that it is incumbent on you to discover those reasons for yourself and not make pronouncements like "probably no one ever even though about long term effects, that's simply not part of the political calculus..." Which is an unquestionably absurd notion. Especially after hundreds of years of data. Like what? That a particular religion is going to take over and enslave us all? Is that one of the questions? If the majority are "convinced" that "mulitculturalisn is a good thing" then the arguments and evidence that produced it must be pretty good. Judging from all those homies and tourists at all those multicultural events just in Toronto, multiculturalism seems to be working fine on the large so far. You mean all those Muslim immigrants? I doubt the French are too concerned about all those Italians and Spanish flooding over borders.

No, but the Metis are Aboriginal. As are First Nations and Inuit.

No. Pinko lefty commies have such a self-loathing and feeling of spiritual emptiness (wot, with their liberal attitudes towards politics, religion and sex...) that they see no other recourse, but to acquiesce to Islam in order to feel better about themselves. Once we are all Muslims, there will be World Peace. Or something like that.