pinko

I am unaware of a similar concept here in Winnipeg.

You are certainly entitled to hold that opinion.

Exactly

WINNIPEG– The Frontier Centre for Public Policy, along with the International Property Rights Alliance, today released the 2010 International Property Rights Index. The Index, measures the protection of property rights in 125 countries. On a ranking of one to ten—the higher scores reflecting a greater protection of property—worldwide scores ranged from Finland with 8.6, to Bangladesh with a score of just 2.9. Canada scored 8.0 on the Index as did Germany and Ireland; all three countries thus tied for 12th position. The scores are based on ten measurements ranging in three broad subject areas: •The legal and political environment (as it relates to judicial independence, rule of law, political stability and degree of corruption); •Physical property rights (protection of physical property rights, ease of registration of property, and access to loans); •Intellectual property rights (protection of intellectual property rights, patent protection, and copyright policy) Results for Canada: In 2010, Canada maintained its position as the highest ranking country in the Western hemisphere, with increased scores for increased judicial Independence and the protection of physical property. Canada was 12th, while the United States scored lower at 15th. On the negative side for Canada, copyright piracy levels continue to be somewhat high for a well developed country – estimated at an average of 33 percent. http://www.fcpp.org/publication.php/3192

No more feudal than that in the USA.

I hope it doesn't happen but at the moment there is a political donkey dance going on with no agreement among those concerned.

Maybe in your world but in the real world the state has all the rights it requires.

No problem. If the USA reneges on the debt that will have worldwide ramifications and those ramifications will be felt in Canada.

You miss my point. The state is not going to put itself in the position you propose. I have given you a link and I would suggest you read it carefully.

I have no idea whether it will or not. All I am saying is that is the drop dead date.

No state will give up the capacity to take property as proposed in the language offered.

You neglect to consider the right of the state in your equation.

Because that is the date the debt ceiling must be renewed.

Here is some information that might help you better understand property rights. "Property and the Charter of Rights Although the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not expressly provide for the protection of property rights, property rights are created and are therefore protected by common law and by statute law, although both can be changed by legislation. Any constitutional guarantee should recognize that property is a social institution that must be constantly remolded. A great jurist has warned that an absolute right of property would result in the dissolution of society. The importance of this warning can perhaps be best illustrated by considering a person who buys a gun. The property rights that this person acquires in the gun cannot extend to permission to use the gun in any way. Similarly, landowners should not be permitted to pollute the air and water because this would lessen the enjoyment and property values of adjacent owners and because of the moral obligation to pass on to succeeding generations a habitable planet. Property rights may therefore be modified to respond to new threats to the environment. There is no preordained harmony between private rights and public welfare; society will always face the dilemma of how to combine efficient use of resources with effective regulation in the interests of all society." http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/index.cfm?PgNm=TCE&Params=A1ARTA0006519 I hope this is helpful to you.

If the computer was confiscated there must have been a reason to do so. The police need a warrant in such circumstances.

I would expect that will become apparent by August 2, 2011.

Could be but it appears the current political dance in your country suggests you may be heading to default.

The property owner needs to make an informed decision when in such circumstances. In any negotiation a party has to have a sense of the negotiation and the consequences of failing to reach an agreement.

I notice eminent domain operates in a manner similar in nature in the USA. As I said there is no need for such provisions.

Yes but Canada didn't renege on debt.

That he did but he will have another opportunity down the road. Maybe the USA is headed the way of Argentina.

For example if a government agency wants land for a hydro line and a portion of your property is required then a negotiation is undertaken and a fair market value is established.

We have ample property rights in Canadian law. Every government ultimately has the authority to expropriate private property.

Obama shouldn't blink. He also shouldn't undermine medicare and social security. The Bush era tax cuts should be allowed to lapse.

There is no need for such terminology in the Charter.