Cartman

Whether or not Quebec is independent, part of Canada, the US or Saudi Arabia for that matter, the forces of globalization will make everyone alike. Everyone's culture is a trivial concern to conservative, neo-liberal, economists and they run the show.

I fail to see your point here. My answer is that hockey players are less important than teachers, yet the latter earn less. Does this not support the notion that society discriminates against teachers relative to hockey players? Speaking of hockey though, why is it that free-market economics is fine when the owners are making bank, but a new collective agreement must be reached when the players are making bank? You might want to explain this to older CDN hockey legends.

That sounds like "both rich and poor are forbidden to sleep underneath a bridge at night" so everything is equal. I do not think so. First, there are far more poor people paying taxes and there would not be roads without them (remember Rosa Parks and public transport?). Second, expensive and inefficient vehicles are subsidized by fuel prices that do not compensate for environmental degradation (I suspect that few "rich"people drive cars like a LUPO/TDI). Third, one person is driving a Lexus while the other an old Ford... or is the rich person just flying?

Nolandmero...what are you talking about? According to I miss Reagan we already live in a socialist country.

We seem to assume that people are poor because they do not want to work. But many "poor" people do work but are not compensated adequately. Why do women earn so much less than do men? Are women lazy? August is right that poverty today is not what it was decades ago or what it is in many other poorer countries today, but it still has consequences for society. I wonder if poverty is PART of the context in which terrorism is born.

True enough, good point Mike.

I am being lazy I know, but does anyone know (off the top of their heads) about how much we would save by eliminating the Senate? Seems to me we already have too many costly levels of government.

Hey August, I do not think that fining people who do not vote or paying people to vote is useful. I just think that the parties need to put forth a platform that will entice people to vote. I am still not quite sure about Chretien's $/vote idea.

I think that regional alienation is a major problem, but let's face it guys, Alberta will never leave Canada because there are simply too many patriots here. They just get really angry when Quebec sep. gets too much attention. I wonder if PR may be a way to reduce alientation. Maybe Maple is right.

An interesting test August. As a general guide it is interesting, but why would they put Thatcher so close to Hitler on the libertarian/authoritarian spectrum? Seems a little harsh (to Thatcher, not Hitler ). I also thought Hitler would be to the left on collectivism. Myself? Economic Left/Right: -4.00 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.59 According to this, I am a little more economically right and a little more authoritarian than I thought.

I miss Reagan, I am sorry to make your brain work so hard, but the Liberals are not "left". The NDP is not "far left". "Far left" is Marxism or do you consider communists and Marxists "super duper ultra amazingly left"? On what basis? You should not try to place inaccurate labels on people. It is just as ridiculous to refer to democratic socialists as "far left" as it is to refer to the Conservatives as "far right". I do not think you know the difference and as a result, your arguments just fall apart and are ignored.

The US is our largest trading partner so obviously they are important to us. Economically, Canada is also important to the US. More importantly, Canada provides the US with political capital when we support their decisions to go to war. Perhaps the US media rarely reports what happens here, but I am sure their government is very aware of what we do. If you read your history books, you will find that US intelligence was quite concerned about the rise of the NDP in the 70's. And, have you ever heard the Trudeau bashing by Nixon in the Watergate tapes? By the way Noel, I agree that most Americans probably could not find Canada on a map but they probably could not find the US either.

Does anyone here really know what "right", "left" or "socialist" actually mean? Seriously, how many people on this forum have actually read Adam Smith, Bentham, Becarria, Ricardo, Marx and Engels, Lenin etc? Before you use words so frequently, you should first know what they mean. As it is, people are not only making gross generalizations about others, but they are also using some key political concepts in a very general and meaningless way.

Setting aside the question of what kind of benefits impoverished people should receive in Canada today (which inevitably becomes the question), we should also ask what is the cost of poverty to the entire society? Are impoverished children more likely to engage in crime when they are adults? Are they likely to contribute to social program funding as adults or are they more likely to be a drain on the system? Will they perform as well in school as others or bring down other students scholastically? Eradicating poverty is not the same as making everyone economically equal. MS has just noted the widening gap which suggests structural, rather than personal, changes taking place in our society.

Well, I guess we must agree to disagree. I do think you should take a quick look at the link I provided. There is no internationally accepted method for measuring poverty. Officially, Canada does not even have one to offer. I would assume though, that the OECD method (which is what StatsCan also uses for international comparisons) is likely the most reliable method at the moment. I am not a Keynesian and I certainly would not want to pay Swedish income tax rates , but I do believe that a wealthy nation must maintain certain standards. I believe that most Canadians cherish their social programs because they have served us well. Seriously, how would we get by without pubilc health care? Many would be ruined without it.

Actually, Canada does not publish ANY official figures on poverty and we do not have an official poverty line. The LICO is just a StatsCan guide for relative inequality; not a poverty line. "Whenever a Canadian news outlet uses Statistics Canada numbers to say a certain percentage of Canadians are "below the poverty line," Statistics Canada makes it clear that its numbers say no such thing. The agency sends off letters stating that its low-income cut-off (LICO) figures are not a measure of poverty, but of income inequality." "The Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development uses another relative measure of poverty. It takes all of the after-tax incomes in a particular country and finds the income such that half the people in the country make more and half make less. That's the median after-tax income. Anyone who makes less than half of that median income is considered poor. By that measure, Canada's poverty rate in the 1993-1995 period was 10.9 per cent. In the U.S., the rate is 16 per cent, while in Denmark, it's 4.7 per cent." Here is a great CBC link about poverty. http://www.cbc.ca/news/features/poverty_line.html

You should read a little more about Sweden's social programs Hugo. They are far from a free ride. They instill personal responsibility far more so than do ours. Their programs, such as EI, are more generous, but are much more stringent in making you search out employment. You cannot just take your cheque and laze about. The result is that people are taken care of, but are more efficient at locating work. A good text? Olsen, Gregg M. (2002). The Politics of the Welfare State: Canada, Sweden and the United States. Don Mills: Oxford.

If any gov't should know something about drugs and alcohol it should be the BC Liberals. Ralph is starting to look like a moderate.

Former PM Kim C. said that she was disturbed by the lack of women candidates in the last election. She described how she could accept policy and leadership criticism while PM, but really hated the way that she was criticized about her earings, clothes etc. Considering that there seems to exist important women's issues, why are they not running? Should people care about this issue? Please, please oh please do not refer to Anne M though. I really can't stand her. :angry: :angry:

Moore is often sarcastic to the point of stupidity, I question many of his facts and wish he would not be so rhetorical. But with all of the propaganda we are exposed to everyday in favour of this war, is it not healthy to finally have a strong dissenting opinion? The death toll is getting higher and higher and I suspect that many Americans are starting to question their government's actions. Also, can we stop talking about his weight? What does that have to do with anything? People lose credibility when they do so. ps I am not fat

An electronics business I managed was constantly a victim of crime. A few years ago I spent months trying to catch this kid I knew was stealing CD's for years. When I finally caught him on tape, kept him there until the police arrived, they explained that he would not be charged because he was in some sort of youth program since his parents were abusive to him. Had my parents ever thought that I was stealing, I would be more afraid of their abuse.

A charitable person's priority is also to redistribute. Donating to starving children across the globe (as my family does for 2 kids) is not the same as robbing a liquor store. Redistribution is not the same thing as theft.

Reducing taxes as a result of efficient gov't is fine by me, but eliminating the redistributive function of government altogether? Are you willing to pay tolls for every privatized road you take? Are you willing to lose subsidies for education which range from 70-80% while a year of university already costs about $5,000? At 29 my wife died from cancer after living a perfectly "clean" life. Thank goodness that I did not have to pay that bill out of my pocket 'cause I can't even imagine what it would be! In order to pay entirely for the destructive effects to the environment caused by your car(s), you would be looking at several times the price of fuel. What would a fully privatized police force act like? Any benefits from government safety regulation of business? Trust me, you guys are most likely receivers of redistribution.

I had my car window smashed and a hit and run as well...that's it. I will not own a flashy car ever. Now, I drive a boring fuel efficient car, keep old fogey CD's that I got from "the bin" in a small town gas station (they still sell tapes too! ) and I always keep a bit of garbage on the floor. In combination with the alarm, nobody wants anything to do with my car. Sad, but it works. Three months ago, a groups of Hutterites on their way to sell produce in town blew by me going about 70kms in a school zone (while kids were playing during lunch). He came very close to hitting one. Later, while I was crossing the street, he happened to drive up so I stopped him by holding up my hand while still in the middle of the street. I yelled at him that he was gonna kill a kid or two 'cause he was really driving crazy. Technically, it is a crime and nearly caused the death of a little one.