fellowtraveller

No, I mean posters here as well as the great unwashed. Numerous rants here before the last election about the dread of Harper/Hitler getting a majority and riding roughshod over Parliament, forcing his agenda on the country and running evrything from the PMO. Hello.....hello....hello... Chretien did that for 13 years, as did every PM before him with a majoritywith a majority. Yet it is promoted as something new, something only the fascist Harper could imagine. There are few checks and balances in our version of Parliamentary democracy. The Opposition is largely a formality. The closest thing to an actual check/balance is the media. I have no problem with people being specifically critical of Harper. I do object to posters pretending he has any different approach to governance than his predecessors. What is scary is that they actually believe anything has changed.

I did not realize they belonged to Hamas.

Good point.France has what is regarded by many as one of the best if not the best system in the world, and it has some elements we do not: - user fees. Everybody pays to see a doctor every time, poor folks get it back. - a much higher number of doctors per capita, about 50% more than Caada. This factor alone would dramatically reduce the wait times for routine procedures.

The shortage of doctors is in some measure the direct result of efforts of doctors themselves to maintain their level of income and privilege. Admissions, graduations, licensing- all heavily influenced by medical associations. There is a certain amount of 'no sharing of the finite pie" in every province.I really don't get the hysteria over 'private medicine'? What does that mean, exactly? The vast majority of docs are private practicioners, they don't work for the government and would be offended if that were suggested. Tons of procedures are not covered now by public plans, and lots more will be deregistered and soon. We'd better get used to it. Two tier care has always existed and always will, just ask Danny Williams and many more. A friend just went to Phoenix to get her knee done, she had been waiting for two years with one more to go, can't stand it anymore and has the money($7500 plus airfare and hotels).

She is fully qualified but they would never elect a woman.

Thanks for the link, but I would bet that the authors(2004) would revise it dramatically in 2011. I doubt there is much distinction between the two now given the social networks and the Interwebs that are accessible to billions. Lookee here, we're on one example now! Disagree, health care is an issue that people react to strongly. The problem is that they do not react rationally. There is no data with health care, every 'discussion' comes down to anecdotes. In yopur mind, is there any limit to how much of the public purse goes to health care? Is health care always more valuable than public safety or public education?

Really? So if I am working for MegaCorp Inc in Detroit with full health care benefits, have kids with asthma and a wife with cancer, have a burning desire to start my one man lawn maintenance empire then MegaCorp is obliged to pay for health care indefintiely and after I leave their employ? US employers are obliged to continue to pay health care benefits when their staff leave to work for a company that has no or lesser benefits?

I don't get the distinction. The point I am making is that though we are rich, there is a finite % of GDP, or provincial budget, or individual finance that can be spent on health care. Not a dollar amount, but a percentage amount. We may be there already, which means that we either have to stop spending as much on public funding of healthcare, cut other core services like education to reassign funds, raise taxes dramatically or allow for private spending on health care- or all four. It is not going to fix itself, and the way things are going our leaders are not going to fix it either. AB is in the middle of a Tory leadership campaign, and two candidates have basically said " let's talk about health care options". Both already regret having done so. We are going to need a massive economic crisis to wake up and see our world as it is, not as we want it to be. Until then, it is all idle chatter with nobody willing to demonstrate leadership, tell all the interest groups to STFU, and keep the discussion on topic.

Do you feel some sort of obligation to be deliberately stupid?

Laugh if you like, but the US health care system defintiely restricts workplace mobility and small business development. If you have dependents, or anybody with a preexisting condition, you are going to be very careful to keep what benefits you have at your current job rather than think of moving.

It is important for every party to pretend they are ready to have a mature and frank discussion. In reality none of them are ready, and few Candians in general are ready. It is a shame really, because there should be no ignoring of the reality that our population is aging rapidly, and that there will never be enough money to keep all of us alive forever. It is the most important topic in Canada, and nobody can open their mouths to speak without being shouted down. There are no votes for anybody except in mouthing platitudes, so that is what we can expect at election time.

Radar detectors are legal in SK, AB and BC. Lots of photo radar in AB, your detector won't help much. They have a law in AB that requires you to slow to 60 KMPH and move to the inside lane whwnever you see an emergency vehicle with lights flashing on the shoulder: police ambulance fire etc. If you don't do both the ticket is huge like $500.

One of the hidden horrors of the US system is the negative impact on workplace mobility and entreprenuers. People stay in jobs because they have good benefits. People don't start businesses because they cannot risk leaving leave corporate benefit plans. Land of the free.

I'm, not 'putting down' anybody or any region, simply speaking of how the numbers add up. Many smaller or regions provinces have been in this situation before, it is unusual for Quebec and unthinkable for Ontario. And no, in a majority govt and our version of Parliamentary democracy the Opposition is scarcely relevant. The unusual wrinkle is that Quebec has no direct influence on the govt, because the MPs they elected can vote en masse on legislation and have no impact on the outcome. Funny how nobody cared about this shit when Chretien was riding roughshod, now it is a big deal when Harper is in majority.

I think CKUA.

Harper would have won a majority anyway without benefit of any seats from Quebec at all, so Quebec is in fact not a factor poltically at this moment. That discomforting reality has not escaped the folks in Quebec, since for the first time ever it puts them in the position of irrelevance for now. That will change at the next election, they know they cannot continue to be represented by a party or parties with no clout in Ottawa. It doesn't matter who takes the NDP loeadership, they won't hold many seats in Quebec next time around. Muclair has the best shot at salvaging something.

everyhting that is wrong with the star system in Hollywood is found in Sandra Bullocks Oscar nomination for her role in this movie.

The reality is that virtually every village in Nunavut and the rest of The North, which is far more remote than Manitoba, already has broadband, which means they already have easy and extensive access to hundreds of radio stations. Don't believe me? Google it. Some of us are living in a fantasy world where some Candians believe CBC Radio is some kind of cultural institution that brings us together. It ain't so. CBC Radio is no different than CBC TV: an idea that is way way past its effective date, with a few codgers clinging to the past. God Save The King.

I'm not sure of the process, will his deathbed letter have to be translated to Latin or Italian or both to be included in the application for sainthood?

I've lived much of my adult life North of 60 or nearly so, so I have no doubt about what is happening in the north. You have broadband but somehow cannot get streaming audio by the hundreds/thousands of stations? Is their some kind of filter in Manitoba on this? No satellite radio available?Andf let us talk money then: your contention is to provide a full national network so as to provide a warm and fuzzy feeling to a few remote communities with very, very few people so they can hear Rex Murphy over the air? Wouldn't it cost a fraction of 1% of that scheme to just provide those communities with braodband access and open the world to them?

I expected to be bored, but CBQM was anything but. It is an utterly charming portrait of life in a small town, centred around the ultimate in community radio stations. If you get the chance, spend an hour. The town is Fort MacPherson in the western NWT, on the Dempster Highway above the Arctic Circle.

then you can easily name one, for the third time. If they have electricity, northern communities have had satellite TV access for decades and satellite radio access for several years. Most have broadband, which means they have much the same entertainment and information choices that you do. They are not the ignorant peasants huddled around the campfire hoping for some news of their country that you are dreaming of. The question is not what I am talking about, but your level of knowledge of the North in 2011. This is not the era of tape delayed CBC rebroadcasts.

Nah, I'm sure he'd appprove of the expenditure for state funerals for all Opposition leaders...like Preston Manning. How much does an Expo cost- $50 million or so to provide maple syrup snacks for Koreans in the hope they will buy copper ore from us? Why not spend the money targetting specific industries in Korea?

Name one. Then put a revised price on your 'case'. The subsidy now is around $800 million, most of which is TV. Does $20 million in 2012 sound fair? $0 million in 2013? I kick $20 per month to the real public broadcaster, CKUA. Money well spent. Why can't CBC supporters drop their offensive, selfish sense of entitlement and privilege and do the same?

Sure they do, but there is no need to be deliberately stupid. Or maybe there is, I dunno. As a CBC listener and supporter, how would you feel about sending $20 per month every month directly to the CBC to pay for the entertainment you now enjoy?