CANADIEN

If that's a joke, don't leave your day job. If it's not a joke, don't leave the hospital.

Me neither, and I wonder if the stats provided would be the same in more recent stats.

If a Nigerian said about the US system what Lesnar said about ours, I would think exactly the same. The first time he needed the US system, it failed him with a wrong diagonis. A failure, actually, a lot worse than what he experienced in Brandon, since our doctor was able to immediately take the measure of his condition without a scan. In fact, the worse danger Lesnar got in while in Canada was through his own recklessness in leaving an hospital that was perfectly able to at least stabilize his condition and endangering his life and that of others with three hours of high speeding. Interesting, btw, that Lesnar has admitted that he had exxagerated his account of the treatment he received in Canada, for political purposes.

Of course, I did not think it through - for thinking it thorugh would mean starting from a view point where human beings are mere commodity. Iwas not about to single out the American slave system, but since you provided that example... Your "so-lucky" hosue slave was sleeping in a shack at night. Food and clothing provided as long as the master found it in his own interest. From a material point of view, only marginally better than a person lving today in a slum in let's say Nairobi. If one were to measure what makes a human being only from a material point of view, neither of them would be much of a human being, with marginal advantage to the slave. Human beings though, have another measure, as beings with a soul, a conscience and inherent dignity. There is not much dignity in a life in the slums of Nairobi. But even that is more dignity than a life as an object... which is exactly what slavery is. That's the concept you either do not graps, or wilfully ignore. You want to know if I find a life in abject poverty, or life under a brutal disctatorship, better than a life in slavery? Neither is acceptable. Nothing short of work for better living conditions and more freedom (both from slavery and dictatorship) is acceptable. But then again, feel free to explain how free a slave is. And if you believe that being a slave is no big deal, I could certainly use one. I have a shack in the back-yard. I think I can spare you two slices of bread and a cup of water (not stale, I promise) a day... as long as you do exactly what you are told. And remember, the moment you become my slave, do not expect to be treated better than I would treat my dog (if I had one) or my TV. You want slavery, you'll get slavery.

I forgot... You don't have a clue to the fact that French-speakinbg Canadians outside Quebec are not (except for those born in Quebec), Quebecers. But hey, feel free to say to an Acadian that he/she is a Quebecer. And of course, French-speaking Canadians were never prevented for speaking... in English. I perfectly know that, between 1763 and 1946, French-speaking Canadians were subjects of the British Crown. What you have no clue of is the following facts: a) not assimilating was NOT and is NOT a failure, quite the contrary no french-speaking Canadian needs to assimilate to anything in order to be a Canadian c) the vast majority of French-speaking Canadians trace their ancestry here to well before 1763. I am not an immigrant here, my parents and grandparents were not immigrants here, and none of my ancestor to the 10th generation was an immigrant here. Not that it impacts on your right as a Canadian, but unless you can trace your ancestry here as far back as mine, do yourself a favour and don't make a fool of yourself by claiming I'm just an immigrant. You mean previously non-Whites were barrd from entering the country unless they could be exploited. Chinese railroad workers were most certainly showing a lack of interest in coming to Canada when they were asking if they could bring their family and they were told no, right Now that I finished laughing. I remember full well you blasting me for calling Quebec's language legislation a piece of m*nure - I hardly call that agreement. And the words dictatorial and racist are not words I would use to describe either Quebec language laws or what you propose for Ontario, which is, as you'd know if you had a clue, about the same thing. You mean as long as you think that it may serves your prejudice. I am still waiting for you to call for a referendum on women's vote. I do not think your defense of Quebec-style language laws for Ontario to be either dictatorial or racist. I merely use your own language. I won't wait for the English translation. I'll simply point out that you do not understand how our parliamentary democracy works.. again. And a referendum with a result that tramples on citizen's rights still tramples on citizen's rights. Cluelss again. A referendum has legal value as long as there is a law confering it legal value. If I organized a referendum tomorrow to ban you from this country (not that I plan to, of course), and even if 99% voted, and they all voted yes, it would have no legal value unless there was a law conferring it legal value. And in a parliamentary system, a referendum is not needed for acts of the legislature to become law. Don't like it? Well. Nazi Germany was very big on referendums. Te Constitution still applies to all Canadians. BTW, that you claim that a Cosntitution not adopted by the Quebec Government was imposed by Quebec proves how clueless you are. Or any others.

It takes an imbecile to conclude that one broken machine makes for a Third World country health care system. It takes an imbecile to blame the health care system of another country is to take the brunt of the blame for the results of a medical condition that HIS doctors misdiagnosed. Nothing to do with where he comes from. actually, his real-life experience, which is partly to blame on the fact that HIS doctors misdiagnosed his condition, is anecdotal at best. Two days earlier or later, the machine could have been working. As he gone to a small rural hospital in the US and there had been a power failure, nobody would conclude that the US medical system is up to par with those of lets say Haiti or Angola. And when everything is taken ito account, from coverage to life expectancy to costs to waiting lists even, as inperfect as our system is I'll take it over the US system any day of the week.

There is, no doubt about it, place for improvement in our health care system. What irks me with this situation thoug, beyond the fact that an imbecile coming from a country with a health system worse than ours compares our health care system to the Third World, is that there are here who actually agtree with him 100%. Let's compare what we have to what the USA have. We live longer Our child mortality rate is lower (only ome developed country, Latvia, scores worse than the US) Our health care system costs less (even government spending per capita (!) Having to forego medical treatment for lack of money is a lot rarer here (add to that, meedical expenses is the main reason for personal bankruptcy in the US, and 40& of Americans (vs 20% of Canadians) are likely to forego buying prescription drugs because of cost) Every Canadian has at least basic health insurance (15% of Americans don't have any) Our mortality rate is lower. According to the WHO, we are overall in better health than Americans There are, of course, areas where the US system is better than ours: = access to higher technology - number of doctors by person - cancer survival rates (for the rich that is) - waiting times(for the rich that is) - yet, interestingly enough, Canadians are more likely to get medical attention without having to go to an ER on week-ends, holidays and at night - profits made by health insurance companies One may be tempted to add access to a family doctor... Numbers I have seen over the years go as high as 20%. In the US... a little under 1 in 5 Interistingly enough, people with acess to I'll add two comments - one is from a friend of mine who is battling cancer "Thank God I'm in Canada in the U.S." The second one is from me. If someone is coming to my country and tell me that our health care system compares to the Third World, they're better come from Western Europe or an Arab country (or Singapore, Japan, Israel or... Columbia). Anyone else does not know what they are talking about.

If you are rich, there is no waiting time, If you are not rich, chance are that there will be no waiting had brock Lesnar been an ordinary Joe who had recently lost his job and his health insurance package, there would have been no Mayo Clinic for him. Had he just got a job and health insurance package back, his insurance carrier would have likely refused to be for any treatment on the grounds he had a pre-existing medical condition. And that's a lot better that what we have... right.

An apt desription of your postings over the last three years or so. You get something right once in a while. As for your vuews... they are those of someone who takes his delusions for reality and misses the "good old days" when the "Frenchies" shyt up and did it in English, and when non-White needed not apply to come to this country. I have not used the words dictattorial and racist, but this a secondary issue. The main thing is that YOU have constantly advocated that the Ontario Government does for the English language what the Quebec government has done for the French language. Which would mean, to use your own words, that you favour dictatorial and racist laws when they suit you. It is been established a while ago (and understodd by those who get it) that there is nothing dictatorial in policies and laws adopted by our elected representatvies, especially when they guarantee respect of rights and equality of rights. As for the amendments to the Constitution, of course I agree with them, since they are a good thing. Especially since half of the time you claim I am French instead of Canadian. As anyone said otherwise. You realy want a list? I'll just start with the five most evident (in no particular order) You don;t get that you want to do for the English language in Ontario what has been done for the French ;anguage in Quebec. You don't get how our parliamentary system works You did not get (and I assume, still do not get) how the notwithstanding clause of the constitution works You do not, at least half of the time, the fact that I am a Canadian And you do not get the fact that you do not get it

Excuse me while I am laughing at your self-description. Excuse me. I was under the delusion that the evil of slavery was something evident enough that it did not need to be explained. Perhaps I should explain why 1 + 1 = 2 as well? But since you insist... Slavery is a form of forced labour in which people are considered to be the property of others. The property of others... Not like a human being, but like a piece of furniture, or chattel. That concept that a human being is a property is sufficient proof of the evil of the slavery, in and by itself. You of course are free to think slavery is not so bad after all. And to volunteer to prove it through your own example.

Which is why the Government has been in hiding from questions. As I said, the one good thing about this prorogation is that it exposes the cowardly side of the current Government.

Far better to have WORKING people stand in line at the food bank, right. But I forgot, we are beyond that. Now we should reinstate slavery. Great. I volunteer you for the experiment.

Coming from the person who keeps referring to non-Whites as savages, bemoans the absence of white-only neighbourghoods, gets into a fit every time he heaars about gays. And I am the bigoted one? I have seen more proof of the existence of the easter Bunny than example of your alleged equal standard. ... and there is still no instance of the words welfare and lifers appearing together in your original posting. That you do not know why slavery was an evil institution says a lot about you.

Nothing would have changed, Argus? Oh really? Let's see... 1) bills that have died in Parliament as a result of prorogation would still be standing, and the whole work would not have to be done again 2) the Government would not have shown its cowardise. Guess prorogation was a good thing after all.

Interesting, isn't it, that you use prorogue a a noun, when it is actually a verb (the word being prorogation)? You obviously don't know what you are talking about. The parliamentary session ceased the moment the prorogation decree was signed by the Governor General. No amount of "oh but they were on vacation anyway" will change that fact. Nor will it change the fact that, as a result of the government action, ALL bills presented during the session and not signed into law will have to be resubmitted. Most importantly, the government is hiding from one of its responsibilities in our Parliamentary system - standing in the House of Commons to answer questions from Members of the House of Commons. OUR ELECTED members of Commons. Our elcted Parliament has been prevented from doing its job not only during an extended holiday period, as is customs, but until the government feels like owing up to its obligations to Parliament. Feel free to make a fool of yourself with assinine comments like "they were not going back until the end of January anyway". Now, I am not one to call the government's decision undemocratic. What I will call it an insult to Parliament. Most importantly, I call the way it should be called - the coeardly action of a government that cannot stand to be questioned or face scrutiiny in Parliament.

Your drivel has anything liberal in it. I find it interesting that there is nothing from you about real solutions - like minimum wage at high enough a level that people working full would not have to go to the food bank. Affordable day care services (with PAID employees). Support for private and community projects that offer affordable home ownership to people with low revenue (like Habitat for Humanity or Toronto's Options for Homes. Better and affordable transit. The list is long.

I was referring to your prejudice against non-whites, Muslims, French-speaking Canadians, gays, among other groups. . In case you didn't notice, I was reffering to the one idea you have right. Those in jail should pay for at least some of their upkeep. Typcal Argus... "I did not mean what I meant". Bizarre, but in your intial piece of drivel noone can find the word "lifer" next to "welfare". Seriuosly, you are hilarious. There is a reason, a very good reason, while Western country abolished slavery in the 19th century. But hey, you are welcome to volunteer to be a slave for a while.m

And then, there are people whose contribution to society we could do before. What you contribute to this site is a prime example. Treat people with dignity, as human beings, and most of them, even among those who at one point or another unemployed or homeless, will find a way to respond in kind. It is when we treat people like garbage that their lives becomes pointless.

Actually, human beings are... human beings. Not waste. The opinions of some human beings, though, is waste... Your OP is a prime example. But at least, I will hand it to you. None of the neo-conserative nonsense hypocrisy snout personal responsibility. With you it is very simple (and simplistic) - the value of a human being is linked to how much he/she does not offend your prejudice or how much he/she can be exploited. Repeat criminals shoud be kept in jail... at least you got something right. But issues of pverty and homelessness are too complex, and too much of s human failure, to be solved with "if they are poor, let's exploit them" attitudes and ideas. We are talking about human beings here, and any idea, any proposal that begins with a denial of that is not worth the keyboard it is written on. BTW, feel free to glorify the past. I won't. Throwing people in jail for debt, hanging them for stealing a loaf of bread, putting them in "poor houses" (really, a form of slavery) when they were down of their luck was, to use a term you feerly use when talking about foreign cultures, barbaric. Besides, it did nothing to solve poverty or homelessness. But then, the problem to you is not poverty or homelessness, it is that the poor and the homeless are not made into slaves for your benefit.

I go away for a few months to get a life and guess what... you still do not get it. Let's get the FACTS straight (even though you won't get them). French-speaking Canadians do not want to have Canada, they only want to be who they know they are - CANADIANS. Don't worry, most people get it.

Let me know when you start doing that

Multiple crimes, multiple counts. Sounds simple to me.

The intent was to destroy cultures, not much difference.

And how do we call your wistful discarding of history?

The proper context of attempts by the Birtish Army, during the Pntiac War, to dissiminate smallpox isthat it was an attempt to kill as many people as possible in a certain population. Hard to miss.