Cartman

We all know how the US used First Nations languages in WWII because any code could be cracked, but the Navaho language could not. Why? Give this some thought. Why could a code be relatively easily cracked when created in secret, but a "public" language impossible to break? The reason is that the development of language is highly complex and takes thousands of years to be shaped by millions of people. Imagine language and words as an ever growing library of ideas. Why are languages different? Why do some languages not have words to refer to things? Why are some languages easy to learn while others are incredibly diffiicult? Why can we not learn language if we have not learned it by the age of ten? As I said above, why do many dying soliders make a reference to their mothers? They do not say "tell my wife that I love her" or some other romantic thing about their wives, they say "mother" and that is significant. It is possibly a subconscious expression of desire for comfort. Why do they not make a reference to their fathers? It does not matter how often a word is used or in what language it is used; this is incidental. It is the idea generated by millions of people over thousands of years but expressed through one word that matters. The words themselves are just symbols of what is important. BTW, this is not just horoscope kind of stuff. There are many disciplines that carefully examine language. There may be measurement error in this particular study, but it is a credible area of inquiry. After all, language is a significant aspect of what makes us human and aware of that.

This is how I view this issue also. Do you think that abortions indicate a change of mind? I mean, one day you want a baby and then all of a sudden for no apparent reason you say "meh...no thanx"? If men could get pregnant BBM, I wonder if you would sing the same tune? Abortion would not even be an issue if men could get pregnant.

Can you imagine an Inuit trying to explain what snow is to a member of a South American tribe who has never experienced it? The Inuit tries to use words like "cold" yet also "burning", "white", it "falls from the sky" etc etc. Apparently, it is pretty much impossible to do. The Inuit have dozens of words for snow, but some people do not. This demonstrates to some psychologists, anthropologists, and linguists that the symbols/language used to communicate are indicative of the experiences of any particular culture. As such, if certain words like "mom" are more valued (not just used more frequently), then this is also indicative of personal experience. Thus, why are mothers more (subconsciously perhaps) valued than fathers to the extent that it is even reflected by our language? What does this suggest about human nature and public policy? Do men need more time to better bond with their children (i.e. Sweden) or are they just doing crappy jobs?

Don't you really think that the CBC does a pretty good job? I did not like the debates largely because of the leaders, but I thought the CBC did a great job with the interactive one on one discussions especially the town halls. I like the CBC but I hate the way they too frequently draw upon US news esp. for foriegn news. When we criticize the media, I don't think it is just enough to say it is left or right. News is supposed to be objective as possible or discuss both sides. My problem is that all media is homogenized and usually done from a US perspective.

I always thought that it was interesting that the last words said by many dying Vietnam soldiers was "mother" or "mom". I suspect that has to do with early childhood socialization. Politically, I am not sure whether language nec. reflects shared responsibilities or needs for change to social policy (i.e. pat. leave) though I suspect some would disagree.

Do people think the problem is one more of owner neglect or some twisted abuse? What kind of sicko would intentionally breed a dog to be especially vicious?

Agreed. I would really like to know if most Albertans are more loyal to their region or their nation. I am not sure but I suspect that we are becoming more nationalistic as more and more people enter the province. A lot of people from NFLD seem to be arriving (even in the south).

I was thinking of only absolute poverty; extreme cases where a someone's life may be at risk. But, it would have to be used very sparingly otherwise we would have chaos.

I think that Sarlo places absolute poverty between 3-8% but many believe he is a little optimistic in stretching money. Relative poverty can be eliminated but it is going to be much more difficult to eradicate. The interesting question is why the Federal government does not have en explicit definition of poverty. They do not advocate the basic needs, market basket measure or the LICO as official measures of poverty.

I think it was in another post that ndpnic mentioned that health problems were a problem in continuing with full-time work and that the cost of medicine was an impediment as well.

Uhhmmm...I don't quite follow here. Sorry. I think that we are relatively well taxed in Canada though the money could probably go further. Perhaps I am being thick?

I agree with most of this but except the stigma part. I am not sure this would be healthy or practical. But I do agree that we need to focus on prevention. I think that families have a major role here.

If I may suggest that we return to the initial question here. If a court finds that a person steals in an effort to feed their family or themselves, should this crime be treated like other instances of theft? Should poverty be a mitigating circumstance in punishment?

We have to incorporate more stringent testing and I think we also have to look at bailing out some of these ranchers who have lost everything or almost everything. Mad cow has been devastating and I am surprised it received so little attention in the last two elections (fed and prov).

No, I have already said that advocating a reduction in government intervention does not make you "pro-American" but I suspect that more "pro-Americans" advance a reduction in Canadian government intervention. They are different. Not everyone is equally patriotic. NC put it well in saying:

Check this out August. It is a pretty good look at poverty and ways they measure it. No consensus really. http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/economy/...verty-line.html

There is a stash of cash sitting in the federal government. It is called a surplus. The government taxed us too hard and is now not willing to spend it on us. There is a stash of cash in the EI fund and the Auditor General just told the feds. that it was inappropriate to have just sitting there getting bigger and bigger. I get really angry when my tax money just sits there and some people face inappropriate eligibility standards for services.

I would argue that I am a fiscally conservative New Democrat and I do not believe that they are mutually exclusive concepts (i.e. like military intel). I have complained in several places that the feds have wasted money and I created a thread about bureaucratic waste asking what should be done. Few people chimed in on that one and I think that here is where the solution is.

I believe that patriotism is a continuum. You are either a Canadian patriot or an American patriot. If you are more pro-American then you are less of a Canadian patriot. IMO, you cannot have it both ways.

You mean so logically consistent that it is predictable. Thanx. No argument here.

C'mon Argus, you don't see the contradiction here? You are angry at paying taxes on your income which is derived from taxes?

Well Argus, I have never voted for the Liberals and I am just as angry as you are about how they have mismanaged tax $$. The problem is that the Cons have turned off so many Canadians that this will continue for some time. I suspect the Libs will get in again unfortunately. I do not understand why you are so angry at a person who complains about a tough situation when one of your own family members is facing hard times. Ndpnic said that s/he was working but medical problems were the culprit. What makes me believe that some anti-taxpayers are greedy is that they will readily take this taxpayer money when it comes to doctor's visits and other gov't programs, but then whine about it as if they had billions in the bank. How many people could pay out of pocket for just one catastrophic illness? We need social programs.

No, actually I meant what I said. I suspect that the right is more likely to be pro-American and therefore less patriotic to Canada than is the left. A quick comparison of left and right discussion forums easily demonstrates as much.

I have a good job and I have no problems paying taxes. Why do you have a problem? I highly suspect that I pay much more than you do. Maybe you need to work harder on that responsibility thing. If you need to "hang on" to your pay cheque so tightly, maybe you should get another job.

D'oh! Messed up that last post.