yarg
-
Posts
68 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by yarg
-
-
I am wondering, what is the motivation for wanting to rehabilitate a violent criminal? Murder being the ultimate in violent offenses, after having crossed that line, why would we ever want to give that individual another chance? At some point I don't care what your childhood was like, or how hard done you were by the system, there are no doubt many, many more people who came from similar circumstances that did not turn out like the murderer. Why is it that some of you have this need to fix that poor guy who only killed his wife because he grew up in an alcoholic family, parents who grew up in the residential school system and never raised him right..why does it matter? At the end of the day he is a murderer and much more likely to do something violent or murder someone again than the rest of us are, that is reason enough to keep that person behind bars, it is a simple, basic reality.
Yes, simple drug offenses, or theft should not put you away for 20 years, but for the worse crimes the other 7 billion of us can carry on the human race without your child molesting, raping, murdering asses.
-
I think global warming is a combination of several factors, some of them out of our control, but some of them in our control.
It's nice that you think that, good for you, but so what?
There is no proof that we are responsible or even if a climate change is occurring, plenty of theories, lots of data, but no real proof.
-
It is a sad commentary on society that she gets paid for what she does, there was a time when she would have been simply told to shut up, and rightfully so, no we have to just accept her as having a opinion instead of calling her for what she is.
-
It's strange how for years we have been told that the registry is a small issue for most people, but now it's the only reason the conservatives won. Don't you ever get tired of being stupid?
-
How many jobless people and homeless people in Canada?
Those people cost tax payers lots of money each year.
They have too much time that they can increase crime rate that make other people life in danger.
Rich people make most money by evil laws such as provide non-exist money to others and ask for interest like which bankers did.
And such as use evil laws and charge others and try to be lawyer to "help" others.
And such as use license laws to prevent others go into a professional area and charge for high prices.
And such as use lawls to monopoly an industry and prevent others do the same job and maintain a high prices.
And such as use wars to robber wealth from other nations, or make money buy take advantage of low labour price of other nations.
Or use patent laws to make unfair large amount of money from the whole world
And many other evil things.
Basically, those are all evil robbery.
To make the world a little bit fair, support poor people should not only the poor middle class's work, they have suffered too much.
The richest should have some duty.
Each certain amount of too many money made by a people should offer a job for a jobless person, if he can not offer the job, he should give the lowest salary to a jobless.
That would make Canada a better place.
Grow up, or get help.
-
Hey buddy easy on the NDP OK.
We just took out the bloq,liberals and the greens in one election.
The big orange needs alot of wakos to feed on and when we're finished chewing up whats on our plate we're going after you buddy!
Who's going to help you now?Helana gergis?
WWWTT
Hey look, a moron.
-
Has anyone in here yet mentioned the fact that the opposition brought upon this election? Don't you think this is just another in a long string of miscalculations from Ignatieff, and perhaps even Layton considering that the CPC now has a majority? In one sense, the NDP gained ground, in another sense, the evil right-wing secret agenda Tories secured a majority. In my view, these events demonstrate, at least in part, a sense of disconnection from the opposition towards the will of Canadians.
Personally, I didn't think the CPC could secure a majority. My faith in Canada has been so damaged over the years. I think the mainstream Canadian press has done a good job on me.
Its strange though, I didn't here the NDP leader lamenting the conservative majority and the inevitable implementation of the evil agenda, instead he seemed fairly pleased with the result, but we already know from 'mastergate' that Jack says one thing and does something else. The NDP self serving?...nah.
-
Looking mighty fine in BC for Mr Jack Layton
Roadmap to May 2: British Columbia
Things have moved so fast during this election, that I've started and tossed more blogposts than usual. But time to put my own list of ridings in play to paper before it's too late.
In doing so, I have tried my best to avoid looking at the many other lists out there, for fear of contaminating my own perceptions. I did answer Calgary Grit's questionnaire in a timestamped textfile that's been sitting on my hard-drive for a few weeks. At the time I had a higher NDP seat count than any of the other contestants, but one that now seems low by many standards.
Still, as any regular reader would know by now, I favour the qualitative approach to calling individual seats when the numbers alone won"t do the job, and in this election they clearly won't. That does leave things open to greater influence of the heart than head, but that's the risk we all take on E-minus-4, isn't it.
Anyway, that being said, I'll forge ahead with my look at the races to watch, starting out west.
Strong contested races:
http://www.punditsguide.ca/2011/04/roadmap-to-may-2-british-columbia/
They are missing your spam on Rabble North Report, strange how you're ashamed to use the same name here.
-
Why do you so enjoy copying American Republicans so much?
[/quotE]
Why is it that you are too unintelligent to see how unintelligent you are?
You actually think that most Canadian conservatives see themselves as US republicans, or that most of us asked for or care about SUNTV?
Is it possible that you aren't voting conservative because you're damned stupid? Or could we maybe just say that we have different opinions about things without bringing ridiculous arguments like yours into the discussion. Yea, its the conservatives that do all the fear mongering, sure it is.
-
I posted this in another thread. Go to the CTV news website and read Don Martin's blog. His take is that the electorate is so fed up with the Cons and Libs attacking each other and everything, and bicker in a very partisan manner. And there is Happy Jack, being cool and saying things the non-thinkers like to hear. Anyway, he says this isn't the people being pro-NDP, this is giving Harper and Iggy the finger
Is that happy Jack or Simple Jack?
And yes, this idea that you need to be a nice guy to be PM or that Canadians need to be 'nice' is just idiotic.
-
What? No. Provinces set their own tax rates. Alberta has a flat 10% tax above a certain tax free amount (amongst the lowest rates in Canada for earners of any income). Equalization comes only from federal taxes, and is given to provinces who do not meet a certain arithmetic average in terms of fiscal capacity. At current, those provinces are, from west to east: Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia.
The problem some Albertans (and Ontarians) have with the current system is that they contribute more in federal taxes than they get back in federal services. As a have province, Alberta gets less from the Canada Health Transfer and no Equalization. Ontario, as a have not province, still pays out billions more than it receives.
Ahh..So Alberta could maybe have lower tax rates if they weren't subsidizing other parts of the country, that is sort of the point.
-
Bricker is full of it as usual.
Go back to rabble north report, I mean Harry.
-
That's correct.
Harper musing about an NDP victory?
Hey Harry why didn't you use the same name you used on babble, it would be easier to know which posts not to read. You're 'north report' is repetitive.
-
I think they are called operating expenses.
-----
WHat exactly are you looking for subsidies for?
If 400,000 people can sign a petition why can they pitch the $1000 each to build the half billion in infrastructure?
It is tax deductable right?
How much do you pay in taxes that could be written off as venture capital? Or operating costs in a partnership?
Oh but who would do that.
Well there it is right there. YOu can't have it both ways so you'd rather just bully around the odd company you can get away with bullying cause you are too lazy to allow free market capitalism to function the way it is suppose to.
Then you dis my crown corp, then you say no, the free market doesn't allow capital to be pooled to deter duopoly.
I'm just saying you arn't willing to do it.
Which one is it, do you support socialism or capitalism?
"A satellite costs $300 million to build, launch and operate"
http://www.satsig.net/ivsatcos.htm
start reading.. there are plenty of options... in which way you go.
Do you believe the hosreshit you write? You actually believe that we have a free market? So tell me, why is it that 15 years ago we had only a couple of options in phone service providers? Why is it that now we have dozens and the cost of long distance is a mere fraction of what it was when the cost of everything else in the world has gone up? It sure as hell wasn't because bell wanted it this way, the governement forced them into allowing other companies to use thier lines, monopoloies are bad for consumers. We have nearly the same situation now, o but wait, secondary isp's are allowed to resell bandwidth to consumers at less than monopolistic rates, this allows consumers to utilize the internet for things that may, heaven forbid, compete with the primary isp's other businesses. Well they can't have that now can they, so, they go to the crtc, make up a problem of bandwidth, which at this point doesn't exist, and the crtc buys it, handing out a ruling that effectively reverts the free market to what it was when bell was the only show in town for phone service, yea, thats the FREE market all right.
It has been said many times here and elsewhere for anyone with the tiniest bit of intelligence to read and understand, Canada has poor internet services relative to our economic standing and some of the highest prices in the world for our communication services. A service that was heavily subsidized by government no less, but you think that we should pay 10's of times, in some cases 30 or 40 times the actual price of data delivery just so bell doesn't have to compete with netflix. I am absolutely fine with UBB, so long as it works the same way that long distance does now, in fact seeing as a lot of my long distance is free for a flat rate of about 20 bucks a month I would even take 20 dollar for 20 gigs and then pay a 300% markup of 10 cents per gig to bell, seems like a fair price. That would give me 120 gigs for 30 bucks, which is about half the price and double the cap i have now, effectively cutting my bill by about 75%, which ironically is similiar to what a lot of secondary ip's charge.
Im a pretty conservative person on some issues, breaking this argument down to a socialism vs capitalism argument is pathetic, this isn't socialism, its highway robbery, legalised for now.
-
I completely understand the desire of people to reduce unnecessary deaths. What doesn't make sense is a fixation with what is statistically an unlikely way to be killed, so is it that some really want to help society or is it simply a disguise for social engineering? Why is it that the same people who are anti gun aren't lobbying the government to ban alcohol? More people are killed in this country as a result of drinking than are killed with firearms, additionally i would be willing to bet there are more multiple death car accidents as a result of drinking than there are multiple homicides from a single use of a firearm. So where is the outrage? Then again prohibition doesn't work, and judging from the increasing rate of handgun homicides neither does a registry, no doubt a ban of those weapons would convince those who didn't register and those bent on murder to turn those guns in. Honestly, the anti gun argument is so tired, you don't like guns, you are afraid of guns, you think hunting is cruel, you think men who like to shoot/hunt are neanderthals or compensating for small penises etc etc etc, who cares, its your right to think silly thoughts, but really, if you want to argue something about guns beyond the emo standards at least try to be rational.
There are and have been for years many seniors who own firearms, and statistically speaking, the haven't been on a rampage, if we were to look at say, immigrant, poc, in our larger cities, who are responsible for a large portion of the handgun crime you would no doubt blame those senior gun owners (mostly white) for treating them badly and forcing them to a life of crime. The leftist charade this country has been suffering through is so played.
-
Cute. Extinguishes responsibilities... but not the rights, as opposed to extinguishing claims to children, but not responsibility for them.
Would that also apply to biological mothers, or are we confining this conversation to single-income families in which the income earner is male and whose income is double or more that of the average household (not incdividual) in Canada.... and, of course, in which the women are cold-hearted money-grubbing bitches with something on the side, both in the marriage and out?
Yeah. Right.
That's exactly the model we should use to write the laws.How about if both parents decide they want those rights, but none of the responsibilities?
Well there are a significant number of women out there that are exactly that, the problem arises when those women still get to get custody of the kids, get alimony payments and the husband who loves his kids and would want them gets to pay out the nose. If i got divorced i would likely be broke, my child support payments alone would be well over 1k/month, now, i don't know about most people, but my kids do not cost me that much per month, not even close. Add in alimony and it would be impossible, if i sold everything we owned and lived in a tiny apartment maybe i would have money for food. But wait, if the kids lived with me i wouldn't have to pay child support, i could keep my house and afford to eat, but hey, the kids almost always end up with their mother no matter how good of a father you are. Most fathers love their children and want to take care of them, i have 3 male friends who have been divorced recently, all 3 support and spend as much time as they can with their children, none of them are bad people. Their wives cheated or plain old didn't want to be married anymore but they still got the kids and still get paid for it. The only divorced woman i know is far from being a model mother moving from one guy to the next and seems incapable of being a good mother, but of course, the kid lives with her.
-
How anyone could ever want to give a second chance to a rapist and a murderer is unthinkable to me, why are you so weak? We don't need those people in our society, lock them up forever and give them the option of ending it, that is more humane than giving them the chance to kill again. Criminals do have a pattern of re-offending if a car thief steals again I can live with that, if a murderer kills again the victim certainly can't live with it. But it seems some of you are willing to take that chance with the lives of innocent people so a monster can get his second chance, cry me a river.
-
We don't need a death penalty, we need appropriate punishment. No, 25 years isn't a long time compared to the eternity that is death. A life taken deserves a life taken, no person convicted of murder should ever have a chance at life again, why would we want that sort of person in our society? They had their chance, they blew it, done. There are 7 billion more of us, life will go on without them, of course there are different types of murders and murderers, but cold blooded killers should not ever have any chance at parole. I would be fine with an option of death given to such killers, knowing they had no chance of leaving prison some would likely accept it. This isn't about revenge, it is simple logic, if you kill someone in cold blood you have crossed a line that most of us would not, we simply do not need people like that in society and have no real reason to give them any chance at doing it again.
-
I'll take the opinion of the people that actually have to deal with gun crime over some anonymous poster in an Internet forum making allegations about police corruption but offering no evidence whatsoever.
Well, i could tell you all about how the chiefs of police association accepted donations from the company that built the overpriced computer network that the registry ran on, or show you proof that the toronto police department used tax payer money to lobby the government against gun owners, and prove how closely they work with the coalition for gun control and in turn how closely it works with IANSA the goals of which are to BAN all firearms, and then there are now the numerous incidents where that same police force has lied and or trampled on peoples rights, and no doubt prove that the vast majority of the leaders of these police groups have very tight connections to former and current liberal politicos.
BUT, idiots don't listen
-
This country is screwed.
-
that's rich... considering the Harper Conservatives have driven the deepest wedge with this issue. But I'm shocked - truly... here I thought Harper Conservatives were against the gun registry as a matter of divisive politics... I didn't realize they were simply taking direction from the NRA.
but, ya ya... all those urbanite snobs just don't get why Floyd & Ernie have no problem registering their pick-me-ups, yet vehemently resist the idea of having to register their squirrel shooters.
Vile, condescending, rubbish.
-
Hey I stand convinced and converted. Everyone should be armed with a gun or whatever else they feel they need to defend themselves at a moments notice. It's obvious the only way to deter the Marc Lepine's of the world is to arm everyone. Is there any reason whatsoever to believe mandatory sentencing would have done anything?
Anyone know where I can get my hands on some grenades?
my god your pathetic
-
So you are suggesting we not recognize the "treaties signed 300 years ago" that established the boundaries of Canada?
The present border originated with the Treaty of Paris in 1783, which ended the war between Great Britain and the separating colonies which would form the United States. The Jay Treaty of 1794 created the International Boundary Commission, which was charged with surveying and mapping the boundary. Westward expansion of both British North America and the United States saw the boundary extended west along the 49th parallel from the Northwest Angle at Lake of the Woods to the Rocky Mountains under the Convention of 1818.
We can't have it both ways.
Forget it, it's beyond you.
-
AG Draft Report: G8 Funding Lacked Transparency
in Federal Politics in Canada
Posted
The 2002 G8 summit hosted in Kananaskis cost us 300 million, now i dont agree with holding the summit in a big city, but, considering this summit was much larger the money spent doesn't seem out of line with the 2002 summit, so where are the complaints about that one?