ZenOps

Of course China cares for our nation. Without Canada - China would probably be paying closer to European rates for things like oil and gasoline... And there are no Chinese that can afford $11.50 per gallon (there aren't many Canadians that can live at a $3 per litre rate either) So its pretty well in everyones best interest to see Canada producing more resources, British, US, China, everyone except third world nations that haven't yet progressed to need massive amounts of energy to make money. Britain (UK) seems to have no interest in investing in Canada anymore. One only need look at Oilexco (Funding pulled by Royal Bank of Scotland) which would have otherwise provided a great deal of money for Canada and a great deal of oil to reduce the cost to its citizens - But they pulled out (they didn't have a choice actually as they ran out of money and nearly went insolvent like Citibank when it was 99 cents per share) BTW: Oilexco hurt Canada Euro oil relations an incredible amount. I mean you don't just give out funding to take it away a day before you are set to pump oil. In many ways it would have been better if they simply stated they did not have the money, or did not intend to see the project to fruition... Royal Bank of Scotland - I swear they are in serious trouble if we should head into a second recession. At least Chinese money is reliable. Funny money printed US dollars and evaporating Euros will be the end of us if we let it.

Skipping class once - slap on the hands. Skipping class twice - send him to boarding school.

Well... At least they still carry Helmut Newton.

BTW: I'm not sure why North America always specifies China as communist. China had an Imperial (British Monarchy Crown-like) system starting from the first Emperor in 221 BC all the way up to the last emperor in 1916 AD. The last Chinese emporer deposed from power while playing a game in his own tennis court in China (sounds strange to some, but that was the thing to do at the time - much like golf is now) The "Chinese Imperialists" of the last 2000 years did not just disappear when Communism "took over" China in 1949. In many ways - it slightly reverted to a republican state (where petty warlords banded together to form a power greater than a singular king or emperor) Its like how people here say Canadian freedom or Canada is "free". Canada isn't free, Tibet is "freer" than Canada is. You can bet your ass though - that every monarchy on the planet fears "communism" or a reversion to a Republican Roman style type of leadership. Royal families are very protective of their hoardes. ME - I'm imperialist sympathetic thats why I'm in Canada

Just a side note: Canada's cellphone infrastructure is also in its infancy. I believe we pay the highest rates of the "first world". Heaven knows that any Visa/mastercard/Lotto 6/49 business completely stops when a Celltower goes down in a remote part of Canada (which is pretty well everywhere outside of each the major provincial cities.) China would probably invest more in Canada, but as I mentioned are hesitant to do so (due to lack of infrastructure and possible reliability). Brits have been proven trustworthy if not a little bit imperialistic. Its the Canadian government which is the problem. Chinese are no idiots, they don't want a section of land that has no roads going to it. The money *must* be invested where it can be of most use (that is placed where one can make the most money by extracting the most resources out) and at least a little bit of redundancy. Right now, that is pipelines. Back in the 1800's it was pick axes for the gold rush, in the late 1800's it was iron and the railroads. Its not entirely a bad idea to expand Canada's cellphone internet structure nowadays as well.

Hehe. Stephen Harper = Hippo critical Democracy from a man who prorogues parliament (maybe twice) to stay in office. As for the US two party system - you had your choice between electing a Black guy or a loser. The next time you might only get a chace to elect a White woman to presidency. I dunno - but that sounds just about as democratic as North Korea, where you might get the chance to vote for Kim Jong Il - or Kim Jong Il Junior. China human rights issues? Like what? Tiananmen? PSHHH... Totally pales in comparison to the 1,021 nukes that the US set off in Nevada - of which they have now compensated some 75,000 US families for cancerous radiation related deaths (IMO, its probably closer to a million) IMO, its their own populace though - Does the US have a right to nuke 1 million of its own citizens? Does China?

Well.. You can also just look at it from the viewpoint that if you don't sell the Tarsands to China, China will just spend the $1.9 billion buying oil anyways (and possibly not all from Canada) sometime over the next 20 years or so. This deal works well for Canadians because Chinese have little to no interest in Canadian real estate (land) They really only want the resources. And a one time lump sum early on is exactly what Canada needs right now. Land is of course not an issue for most Canadians, because 89% of Canada is owned by the British Crown Corporation anyhow (and not for sale to anyone, white or otherwise) Canada is very strapped for infrastructure, including pipelines. We really only have the one main highway in Canada or the one main railroad, which China views as a very weak point in doing business with Canada. Canada is without doubt a very young nation with little to no infrastructure built (Rome had not only a ring road, but 8 seperate highways leading into it) China is built much the same. Even Britain thinks Canada has too little infrastructure... I'm still in the camp that we have a long way to go. Two seperated highways in Canada would go a long way to alleviating my fears of a nightmare scenario of some natural disaster hitting the one highway - causing Canada to crumble. Most of the $2 billion will go towards the construction of the $16.2 billion Mackenzie pipeline, which is also sorely needed (and been on the table for many decades, but unable to build due to lack of funds). Canada is not building anywhere fast enough to meet demand from Britain, US or China. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/mackenzie-pipeline-gets-a-boost/article1415219/ "The 1,197-kilometre line would bring up to 1.2 billion cubic feet a day of natural gas from onshore basins near the Arctic coast to the northern edge of Alberta, where it would connect to the province's distribution system." http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1809900,00.html "And in the U.K. diesel costs $11.50 per gallon, compared to around $3.90 in the U.S."

Queen Elizabeth II is old. No offense meant, but shes what almost 84 now? According to a lot of people we aren't created equal. The Pope arguably owns more than the Queen and has more power than the President of the US. Tiger Woods is a billionaire because noone else in the world can drop things into holes like he can, haha The whole idea of Canada is based on British superiority (if not as a race, at least as a superior lawmaking system) Heck, in this world everyone knows that Coke is better than Pepsi or Dr. Pepper.

Well, only Brits really own some the 11% of Canada that is not owned by the Crown. Very few other Europeans do, and no Chinese of course (Even europeans coming from the "wrong" part of Europe never had the ability to buy land in Canada) After WWII, you'll be lucky to ever have a German Canadian ever be allowed to buy land in Canada (or the commonwealth) for the next century at least. I think they are just lucky they didn't put up a wall around the existing German Canadian population. Heaven knows the English speaking Japanese Canadian population had everything physically taken from them and threw them all in jail for being of a certain ethnic background. (And all the Japanese Canadians interred spoke fluent english as it was a requirement for immigration) Which is in no small way - probably the way it should be. The natives own it, we should all be paying them (and not the British Crown) directly on land lease. Somewhat off topic: I fully expect to see the Egyptian owner of Wind Mobile Canada - to have his license reviewed and possibly revoked at some point in the near future. Tony Clement is hardly the highest man on the totem pole, and Canada does have very strict laws against foreign (non British) ownership, land and especially airspace. To that I say to the Egyptian guy - wait your damn turn. If a 1800's direct descendant of German, Russian (and up until officially 1993, French) or Chinese landed immigrant can't buy a section of land to grow food in the year 2010 - then you for sure shouldn't be allowed to setup a phone company in the year 2010. BTW: I'm pretty sure that even as laughable as the idea would be - Canada would not make a penny off selling or leasing parliament buildings to anyone. I'm pretty sure they are a part of the "Crown Corporation", just like any other business - Canadians do not own those buildings. Crown Corporations: Canadian National Railway (CNR), which spawned Air Canada, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), VIA Rail, and Marine Atlantic. Today, Canada Post Corporation is an example of a functional department being realigned into a Crown corporation, while the Business Development Bank of Canada and Export Development Canada are modern examples of Crown corporations. Hudsons Bay (fur trade mainly) is one of the extremely rare cases where a British Crown corporation was sold to a Canadian entity (probably because them Brits lost their love for fur.)

I wouldn't mind seeing William on a bill at some point in time. Assuming he never does a "Tiger Woods", so far he seems "coinworthy". http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/29/business/main6034935.shtml

http://www.canada.com/news/national/Rare+1936+penny+expected+fetch+auction/2389477/story.html "The coin was produced in 1937, after the death of King George V. Canadian authorities had prepared to produce coins with the effigy of King Edward VIII, who succeeded George V, but Edward VIII then stepped down from the throne to marry an American divorcee and the dies for the coins carrying Edward's image could not be used." It will be interesting to see who is going to be on our coinage when Elizabeth passes the throne. I'm solidly against putting Charles on it. Generalized British Crown - Fine, but not Charles.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/12/28/china.britain.smuggler/index.html "The 53-year-old is the first European executed in China in 50 years, according to the British legal group Reprieve." Normally - People like this are simply extradited to their country of origin for justice. This time however, they kept and executed him with great speed. Maybe China is getting tired of too many British drug dealers? Feels a lot like the British are losing their ground, even on typically loyal Canada: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/03/20/galloway-ban-canada-kenney.html I blame Charles as a weak authoritarian figure, Really I do.

Middle easterners are finally figuring out what Europeans and Chinese have known since the 1800's gold rush. Immigration can be just as easy as jumping onto a larger cargo boat and heading for a colder climate shore. Papers be damned. Really though - with only 30 million people and a ridiculously large land border, there is little left over to protect the pacific and atlantic, along with a rapidly melting northwest passage. And in truth - if the British had their way the population of Canada would probably be closer to half (15 million) if not for the somewhat more *questionable* immigration. Of which we would be in even more dire straits as there aren't really enough people as is right now. With a population density like that, the entire of Canada would probably be 20 years behind what Newfoundland looks like today. It took every single penny and last man Alberta had to create the pipelines and oil rigs. Nothing else was developed, in many ways it was an "all in" bet on oil that has finally paid off. Without the manpower we would have definitely missed the first and second oilbooms.

Well, other than the fact that most of the land in Canada is Crown Land. You constitutionally do not have the "right to enjoy your land" It was the first failed amendment to the Canadian Constitution on April 18, 1983. So if you you don't like the land - No problems, you never had the right to anyways... I don't know whether to laugh or cry (but would still like a small piece of Canada after being here for over a century)

I don't think China gets anything from anyone in the Copenhagen deal. China would be paying into the Copenhagen accord just like the US. In fact I believe Hillary Clinton wanted to see an equivalent 100 billion dollar pledge from China. The money would be spent on the "other" 190 nations, not the 16 speaking nations. Hugo Chavez is actually very wealthy in Venezeula - who can afford to subsidize gasoline to 30 cents per gallon in his country.

Haha, props to someone who does their homework. Yes, China puts up a new 600MW coal power plant about every two weeks regardless of its hydro expansion. The Three Gorges really only represents about one years worth of electrical demand growth.

Noone cared about the environmental impact when Hoover went up either. Other than the farmers who were very glad to have a capturable and more reliable water source that is. Would you rather China put up another 36 600MW coal power plants? There are very few downfalls to a dam once built. Canada is nowhere near clean per capita. We actually have a higher per capita carbon footprint than a US citizen.

IMO, China already did its part with the finishing of the Three Gorges Dam. 22,000 MW of squeaky clean power - equal to approximately 36 coal power plants (or 11 Hoover dams) or enough to power Alberta and still have plenty of electricity left over. Actions speak louder than words. As small as a market as Alberta is in comparison, we still use carbon emitting power for 85% of electrical generation. http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/Electricity/682.asp And thats not even talking about oilsands development, just electricity generation.

Well... Technically Canada does not own most of its own land mass. Canada never got around to full independance or independant land ownership. There are some exceptions, but not many. The reigning British Monarchy owns 89% of Canada as crown land. Much like how China owns Tibet. Tibet may however undergo a temporary land transition under the British Crown (like Hong Kong for 99 years) or perhaps even for an undeterimined amount of time. If Harper prorogues government for a second time - he may be pushing the nation back under British rule of law (of which we parially broke away from British rule back in 1982, the US became fully independant back in 1776.)

Sure, I'll admit the first generation of Chinese were hardly saints. By todays standards they would probably be considered "Human trafficers", of which Chinese of that era (1885) most definitely did illegal transport both Chinese and Europeans into Canada. I don't think people truely understand the level of control the British had over Canada way back when.. Every non-English speaking European was basically stopped from immigration. If you got rejected by the "official" British immigration, you had one other choice - go to the Chinese and get passage to Canada from them, many German speaking Albertans took up the Chinese route. One of the reasons I think the British setup the "Exclusion Act" or "Head tax" was because there were too many Chinese and non-English speaking Europeans entering Canada through Chinese transports (Of which the local British Farmers were much against at the time, a protectionist policy for the wheat and fur trade) The reason Chinese could do this of course is because they have ships capable of oceanic transport. Commercial airflights did not become affordable to anyone but the elite and royalty until sometime after 1950. As of today, most freighters of that size are still Chinese owned. And of course the British in Canada had and still have zero oceanic protection (no Submarines to stop illegal immigration) Why did the Chinese transport Europeans into Canada? Unofficially it was to gain access to a quarter section of land put under a white persons name after the laws would hopefully change sometime in the future to allow foreign (non British) ownership (of which the Wind mobile Egyptian guy is an idiot for not creating a shell British company to do business in Canada) As of today it has yet to materialize. Sad how even today - an Egyptian man spending $440 million can be rejected from doing business in Canada because its more than 50% funded by a "foreign entity". I don't remember Sir Richard Branson (Virgin mobile) ever having any problems setting up shop. Chinese have a saying "You can't buy land." And if the Tsuu Tina rejection $250 million for the quarter of Calgary is any indication, it still holds true to this day. PS: The first few generations of whites in US (and to a lesser extent Canada) were hardly saints either. The 250 million+ natives that were genocided would probably attest to that (if they were alive that is)

Were all poor, its just a matter of relativety. Tiger Woods might be middle class (1 billion net worth or so) The Queen is probably one of the few who has control over trillions. However, the poorest of the poor are usually the ones that need the lotto the most - Just like the sickest of the sick are usually the ones that are the ones that need "spritual hope" the most.

What a douche Harper is. In my book, prorogueing government was only to be used as a last resort in time of great need (like a world war) This is outright abuse of power if he tries it again. We might as well just dissolve the entire government and just ask the Queen to rule Canada again.

Hey, hope is hope. Are you going to be the one stopping a family from spending ridiculous amounts of money to fly in a religious spiritual healer for a "laying of the hands" session on a serious condition patient just because you don't find any value to it? I see gambling as no different, if anything - its morally wrong to take gambling away from the poor.

It does have some real benifit too. If you believe that 1000 monkeys typing on 1000 typerwriters will eventually write the greatest novel ever than thats a different story... But most people do believe that elevating one person (finanacially) above the rest whether through luck or sheer ability is something attainable and desireable - SPARTAA! If you don't let people have the chance to think that they will someday become a supermodel or a sports star, then there *will be* no supermodels or sports stars. Why would anyone go to a bar if they didn't think they had a chance of getting lucky? Belief in change is what keeps the world turning. If religion wasn't around to make religious people think that they would be swallowed up by the devil tomorrow, how much would actually get done?

I have no problem with 6/49 gambling. It gives poor people hope. Sure its 1 in 10 million+ hope, but its still hope. A few dollars (as long as its not overdone) should be left up to the person to decide what they want to do with it. If someone wants to spend $100,000 and climb a mountain knowing that there is a 50/50 chance of freezing to death on the way up - let them do it - its their money. The only questionable part is when we have to bail people out (like rescueing aforementioned psycho mountain climbers, or more than likely addicted gamblers) But as the US people say "pursuit of happiness" its not "the achievement of happiness" is whats important. Of which the lotto definitely fills a void.