Cartman

Whatever. That's easy Kimmy. Here is the surefire perfect plan. Rezone the area as a national park, suggest that there might be energy like coal in there, Campbell and his advisors will conduct their 5 minute environmental assessment over a 2-4 of Coors (or crystal meth. whatever) and then watch the corporations clamour to practice "environmentally friendly, and sustainable" industry. The mountain will be gone in no time and the reclamation will look like crap for hundreds of years. When I think of PET, I recall Ontario lakes and the fall trees. Fall in Ontario is beautiful. That seems more suitable but really....who cares? It is just a mountain.

Dean was the only decent candidate they had. Not very articulate I think, but at least he had an alternative point of view. I would agree with Bush on his views of Kerry and I would go even further. I would say that the Democrats were very opportunistic when they elected Kerry. IMO, the ONLY reason he won was because of polls indicating he could challenge Bush. They are gonna pay for it now because it is better to go with the devil you know than... Bush will win these debates if he is aggressive. He was actually pretty well spoken right after 911 in NY when he said something like "I hear you and pretty soon the people who did this will hear you too". He is not that bad at debating when he is on the offensive but he absolutely sucks when he tries to be extra compassionate and caring. Simply put, it is just not him. IMO, that is when he tends to really screw up. He is no good with scripts either. When he strictly follows these speeches, he looks like he had a lobotomy.

Are they just injection sites or do they offer resources for quitting? I am always astounded at how many people get addicted to these drugs. When I lived in Van, it was pretty shocking to me and they needed to do something. PFF is right about prescription drugs. They are remarkably easy to get and many are very destructive (liver). Since they are legal, people seem to think they are alright. I once read a book about the common side effects of various prescription drugs and I was really amazed. Trust me, read up before you take any drug.

That was a really interesting article August. I hate when companies like Telus (and others) bundle services so that you only have the option of all or nothing. The logical extension is to argue that we need more competition, but I wonder if we have a large enough market to sustain that level of competition and therefore need the CRTC to remain a watchdog. Last year, Telus changed directions entirely after Klein warned them about service complaints. They had fired thousands and then hired them back and more. I am not quite sure how the AB gov't had the ability to do this.

CBC Tue, 28 Sep 2004 http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...oli_040928.html Finally! The three restaurants are finally named. I wonder how many people ate at these places when the Board knew something was wrong here? I did not realize this. Maybe it never was the meat. "We know from other outbreaks that have been reported in North America that lettuce has been watered with water that may have been contaminated with E. coli and that has been a source of E. coli outbreaks in the past," said MacDonald.

MS, you sound really confident about the NDP winning this riding. May I ask why you are so confident? I did not see a poll from the article in question. Maybe I missed it?

CBC Last Updated Sat, 25 Sep 2004 http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...coli040925.html If any law suits come out of this, I hope the health authorities are included.

Nothing bothers me more than fiscal waste. While I believe that $$ are often needed to solve problems, I also believe that there is way too much waste in government and that this is a problem for every political party. Even in Alberta where my better half works in gov't, they seem to spend endless hours talking about work (called meetings) and a few actually doing work. They constantly go on vacations paid by the taxpayer (called conferences) and stay at lavish hotels and resorts. The waste is significant, but if they do not spend the money they get, then they do not get the money to spend ever again. Though cheaper, privatizing things often doesn't work because programs often become too streamlined and there is still little value for the tax dollar (i.e. our student loan "service"). After all, waste is spending too much $$ for too little value. IMO, I consider it more wasteful to spend any $$ on useless services than to pay too much for useful ones though, for good reasons, I am sure many will disagree with this sentiment. So, the million $ question is how do we ensure that dollars are spent wisely? I don't think the waste is due to wages, because you need to treat competent workers fairly. It seems to me that we need more audits/reviews throughout gov't institutions to ensure that bureaucrats are not just spending $$ in order to appear underfunded.

I will look into these cases...sounds interesting. If memory serves, the GAI was supported by all three (PC, Libs, NDP) major parties in the early 80's, but it never made top priority. I think MS is just saying that there should be more centralization with these programs as many were not designed for this era. I think the PC's liked the idea because it was perceived as a way to squeeze out some admin costs. I like the idea of shaking up bureaucracies every now and then.

I have never understood why local gov't have not invested in more cycle lanes. When I lived in Van., I could not believe the number of cyclists hit by cars (and buses). On the other hand, true bravery is shown by cycling in Calgary.

When you control for "time away from the job" due to maternity leave, "seniority" and "education", the differences in wages b/t men and women almost disappear, but not entirely. Even using the median (less sensitive to extreme cases) to calculate weekly earnings by occupation, women still earn considerably less. Compared to men, women are far more likely to live in poverty regardless of how it is measured. It has, however, changed considerably over the past 100 years.

What is striking to me is how "cheap" the programs have become. Reality shows are popular largely because they are relatively cheap and easy to produce. And I do not accept that this is necessarily what people really want. People are not making entirely free choices in what they view because they are offered a limited menu in the first place (despite the number of channels on the air). Just because people watch something does not necessarily mean that is what they enjoy. If that were the case, then we would be led to the conclusion that people love commercials when most consider them a nuisance. There might have been a lot of mindless stuff on in the 70's, but I do not think there was the cheap, sick and repulsive crap on now (i.e. Springer, Fear Factor, the Bach., COPS etc). What's next, beheadings and public executions?

I think that PFF has already said that the restaurant must cook the meat to eradicate the bacteria. For most restaurants, this is the main service they trade. I say release the names of the culprits and let informed people make their decision to go there or not. As it stands, I am just avoiding eating out altogether and I do not see why restaurants who work hard to ensure the safety of their customers and their reputation should be penalized for the mistakes made by others. And it looks like the gov't expects things to get worse. http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...gary040924.html According to the Sun (yeah I read a Sun for the second time in my life), two restaurants have voluntarily closed their doors for a bit. I hate bureaucrats. :angry:

MS...I love the idea of a day without television! Imagine what would happen if it was extended for a week? People would probably go crazy trying to figure out what to think. My father does not own a television because he just could not take the brainwashing and the endless commercials anymore. He relies on books and more "legitimate" internet sources for information. IMO, his thoughts are more refined and logical if seemingly odd at times as a result.

As we get caught up in debating whether a pie in the face = 30 days in jail, we are neglecting the real issues here IMO. #1. Security. Klein's security deserves some punishment here as well. Unforunately, it is becoming apparent that Canadian politicians need more protection. Why? Is it because there are more deranged people obsessed with politicians and power or is it because politicians whimsically avoid and disregard large sectors of their electorate? #2. Forums for discontent. IMO, politicians at all levels seem more and more distant from average people and I don't care whether they are NDP, Con, or Lib or live in Edmonton, Victoria or Ottawa. Political stripe and proximity does not mean better representation. By law, politicians should be forced to hold press conferences and ordinary people should be able to voice their discontent in a secure and polite but public manner. #3. Motive. Why did this person do this? Was the person simply irrational? Was it necessarily someone from the left as has been intimated above because I do not believe as much? Was it a hooligan? Perhaps this person was bitterly frustrated with government policies and felt alienated. All I am saying is that there is a larger problem when Canadian politicians require a militia to go out in public. As it is, governments and politicians have a significant impact on our lives and I think we need to make them ALL more accountable. Imagine what would happen if the media made politicians as accountable to the masses as are Hollywood celebrities and NHL hockey players.

Oops...I should mention one last thing and I suspect that most Calgarians will agree with me. There is an undercurrent of "beef/farming rage" here and it is best to avoid the topics in polite conversations.

I think you are right August. Kind of ironic that these bureaucrats who are paid to disseminate "information" on risk-taking are so risk adverse to do so. But then again, I suppose it makes sense.

Calgary is a great city though it is growing at a fast pace. The result is that infrastructure cannot keep up so there is always construction and traffic jams. There are many smaller communities next to it so if you are trying to avoid city living, it is quite easy to do. The economy is quite strong. It is very sunny and dry; temperatures can fluctuate dramatically in a day. The great part is that you are right next to the mountains and the recreation and beauty they offer. Politically, the frustrating aspect is that it is very homogenous with swings taking place every 20-30 years. IMO, Canadians (esp. Calgarians) do not like open political dissent even though we preach tolerance and acceptance (most people do not seem terribly interested in politics anyways). If I were coming from the US, Calgary would probably be my first choice. I would agree with this sentiment especially the part about considering revitalized communities.

CBC Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:21:24 EDT http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...ary_040922.html I think that this is really irresponsible behavioiur on the part of this fed/prov. institution. Canadians have the right to know which restaurants have spread this bacteria. Not knowing leads people to question what they have eaten in the past week raising fears of infection. I suspect many will go to the hospital for minor stomach aches raising taxpayer costs. Why do you think they do not release the names of the restaurants?

I apologize for taking only a small section of your argument. If DD laws were eliminated, I think it is not unreasonable to assume that there would be an increase in this behaviour accompanied by an increase in accidents. By driving drunk or stoned, a person is knowingly increasing everyone elses' exposure to unwanted risk which is a form of victimization. What exactly are natural rights? If I leave my 1 year old child in my locked car for an hour and leave to go drinking, but the child is not hurt, have I not committed a crime and require state punishment? Alternatively, if another person engages in the same act but the child is hurt, should they receive an onerous punishment while I do not? If my mechanic forgets to adequately tighten the lug nuts on the wheel of my car and I nearly get into an accident but no actual harm comes my way, is s/he not responsible for increasing my exposure to risk? If the same mechanic does the exact same thing again but the customer is killed, should a heavy punishment be levied this time?

I am surprised by the lack of responses to this post. I find this incredible. Does anybody know the actual chances of these bills being passed? I am not entirely clear on how the US system works.

Hugo, might I ask what theorists/writers have influenced your perspective? As per other threads, I doubt the applicability of anarchy, but I am interested in how you come to the conclusion that it can be accomplished.

I watch A LOT of hockey. I suspect fighting has decreased but IMO, that is not the problem at all (with a few exceptions). The problem is the hooking and pulling by inferior players. I hate to see great players being pulled down or back by slower, less talented ones who know how to do it just enough to ruin the play, but not too much as to be penalized. That sucks and I highly doubt anyone enjoys watching it.

As the first post suggests, maybe we should just try to ignore all of the so-called environmental "evidence" and just hope everything goes to plan with no economic or health consequences. We can just say that qualitative research is entirely subjective and quantitative analyses do not ever actually "prove" anything, they merely disprove existing ideas. Good luck.

Yeah MS call a politician. But, if you call your premier or some of his staff, remember to lay off the alcohol bashing or the hard core drug bashing. It is a sensitive topic amongst BC Liberals for some strange reason.