Scotty

Or low taxes.

I'm thinking he was being somewhat sarcastic...

So you're saying that instead of issuing bonds all we need to do is allow massive deflation of our currency? I can see how that would encourage exports and discourage imports. But it would, given we manufacture almost nothing, also result in massive inflation, would it not?

Has it occured to you that nothing you advocate above is of any real importance or would have any real impact to the vast majority of Canadians?

I think one of the difficulties of these kinds of discussions is so few people have much of an understanding of basic economics. I can barely remember my college economics courses from 20 years past myself, and at least I actually TOOK some. But quite aside from government borrowing, let me ask you this question. If the government budget was in balance, and the government did not need to borrow any money, do you believe there would be no issue with Canada running enormous trade deficits on a continuing basis? As if, for example, we had no oil to export? I mean, clearly we are importing almost all our manufactured goods. If we didn't have oil to counterweight that do you think that wouldn't cause us any problems?

Remember the bird flu scare from a few years back? Well, scientists haven't forgotten it. In fact, some have been working hard - to make it stronger. Now they've succeeded in creating an airborne version of bird flu, with its 50% kill rate, and are eager to share all the details with the public. Only those rotten Americans want them to shut up. Censorship talk over bird flu

I saw a BBC show a few months back on a Roma village. I think it was in France or Italy. It wasn't on the roma as a whole but on how they marry girls off so young. It seems that the value of a girl (who gets married around 14 or so) is related to how much money she can bring in through her thievery. The cameras trailed these three young girls, as well as a couple of boys into the city every day, and watched how they tried to steal money from people at ATM machines, shoplift, steal purses, etc. etc. It wasn't very flattering to the Roma, uhm, culture.

I'm not arguing against free trade. Yes, the theory of free trade is sound. The application, however, can cause difficulties. In the case of China, though, you do not have free trade except in one direction. You have a predatory nation flooding our economy with good which are far too cheap because the way they manipulate their currency, and violating every rule of international trade to ensure that as much manufacturing as possible takes place in their country. That includes making life as difficult as possible for manufacturers in other nations by stealing trade secrets and undermining their markets with below-cost goods. What does an 'inkling' mean? Does it mean you're aware of the degree of trade law violations the Chinese government is guilty of? No, every nation does NOT violate their trade agreements. And when they do and that's found to be the case, they change the policy. China does not do this. China simply slightly alters their illegal behaviour and subsidies and then continues on. If you think it's only the view of the extreme left that big money has perverted the US political system then you're awfully out of touch.

I don't think that would be an issue with a partner of a different sex. Since the state doesn't recognize that your original marriage has any legitimacy it won't object to you marrying again. I can't speak to the gay marriage thing, as to how the states which allow gay marriage would treat it. But if there's a problem for gay Americans getting divorced perhaps one of those states which allow and recognize gay marriage might consider lifting their own residency requirements...

With a fair degree of accuracy.

What're you, the PC police?

Incompetent journalism which seeks out 'shocking' stories is not a conspiracy. If you're unaware of its existence perhaps you shouldn't really be commenting on such things. Then again, as a person who basically said you're not interested in informing yourself of any of the facts behind a position you hold what value is that position worth?

The government cut the size of the pulp and paper industry when it agreed to allow raw logs to be exported. There are far more jobs, and more profit in processing the logs here. Yet the more we allow raw logs to be exported the more the industry clamours for more. Why not? They hold timber licenses and they can simply cut down the logs and ship them to China or Japan for healthy profits. But there are better jobs and more economic activity to be had in processing them here. Other industrialized nations do so. Why can't we? I'd enter into agreements with other lumber producing nations, for it's in their interests as well to not ship raw logs to China and Japan. Same goes for oil, which you didn't comment on. Because for decades now China has demonstrated its complete contempt for the rule of law. It flouts international trade laws at every opportunity and engages in all manner of often brazen violations and predatory activities. An example would be the fact that some government departments have still not fully assessed the damage from the Chinese government's hacking attack when they were looking to buy out Canada Potash. They simply hacked into government and industry computers to obtain inside information. This is something the Chinese do routinely, on behalf of their state owned enterprises. Something you would have an inkling of if you'd bothered to read my previous cite. No, they are doing it overtly. The American government, in particular, is very nearly completely corrupt. Its paymasters are the corporations which donate hundreds of millions to their campaigns, and promise politicians million dollar jobs if they are booted from office. They aren't entirely wrong.

Trust me. I know. I have no interest in sex with women my own age NOW, and I'm nowhere near 65. Womens bodies are infinitely more attractive than mens bodies. Even straight women have told me they believe that. But round about forty or so most womens bodies tend to spread out in all directions and best resemble a pudgy potato. Now if you grow old together with a woman that doesn't matter so much. But meeting one afresh leaves me with no desire whatever to see them without their clothes on, or to guess just where their breasts end up once they remove their bra.

States create laws for the benefit of their own residents, not foreigners. This is particularly so given that foreigners living in a state which does not recognize the validity of their marriage have no actual need of a divorce. They want an emotional parting, which is, to an extent, understandable, but it's not exactly a great human tragedy if they simply have to go their own ways without one.

I didn't say it was a 'minor affair'. I think the Church behaved disgracefully, and the individuals involved should have been defrocked the instant their guilt was known. However, the evidence I have 'wasted my time' in looking for suggests the vast majority of such incidents involved post adolescents, ie, teenagers, and not small children, and that the rate of molestation, or illegal activity by Catholic priests was no higher than in the general population. Now one might say that's not good enough, but nevertheless, the incidents were not nearly as numerous as people seem to believe, and are in the past. Yes. 1) Shoddy journalism which loves to focus on the Catholic church because it's seen as the 'enemy' of social liberalism and 2) shoddy journalism which doesn't know what a pedophile is (hint, it's not screwing teenagers), and 3) intellectually lazy people who don't bother to actually look into anything themselves but simply take it for granted that the impression they get from casual viewing of the media must be completely accurate.

Anything can be made a crime, if the government so chooses. Cutting my fingernails can be made into a crime. But where is the victim? It's undeniable that it's a crime. Ie, it's against the law. I'm just not seeing a victim (absent evidence such pictures/videos are specifically done with pornoraphy in mind and not for the perverse sexual desires of the person involved). There's no evidence of that. As I've previously stated, child molesting happens, with or without the presence of cameras. The cameras are not the inspiration for the molestation. The pictures/videos are a byproduct of the act, not the cause of it. And there is no real way to profit off such things, as far as I'm aware, without taking enormous risks for very little reward. Any number of studies, often biased, have attempted to prove a causal affect between pornography and sexual violence and all have failed. Pornography does not cause sexual violence.

Ironically, I saw a story on this on CNN this morning. Except it wasn't about Canada. It was about Washington DC. It seems you can get married if you're gay in Washington DC. You can't get divorced, though, because - wait for it ---- they have residency requirements for divorce! Same goes for a number of US states.

I have to agree. The thought of having sex with a 65 year old woman is not likely to become any more appetizing to me even when I'M 65 too. :-O

If you think official languages and multiculturalism are Canada's most important 'institutions' it's you who's out of touch with the mainstream.

It's appealing but unrealistic. It would take forever to get a consensus, and it leaves open the certainty that the government would have to cut deals with dozens, scores of MPs, all of whom want something in exchange for their votes. It might be a bridge, highway repair, a new museum, river cleanup, a government office building, who knows. But it would cost money. And they'd had to do that on EVERY vote.

You want to lock up people just in case they attack children? Do you want to lock of schizophrenics too? The fact you are resorting to emotionalism is not lost on me. It bespeaks someone uncomfortable with their facts. Child pornography is made up of many things, including 'children being sexually assaulted', but for the most part, as far as I'm aware, they are basically just nude pictures, many of them of teenagers taken by themselves, and of drawings, and of written fiction. And while I'm not denying that the criminal code makes it a crime to view such material what I am saying is there's no evidence that viewing them actually harms anyone. No, not in the least. Nothing you've said is more than pure emotion, and appealing to emotion does not convince me. Coherent arguments, logic and evidence does. I believe that in most cases it is a victimless crime. I don't disagree it is a crime. Where is the victim in reading a fictional story about someone under 18 having sex? Where is the victim in looking at a computer generated image of a naked cartoony child or youth? Where is the victim in looking at a painting of someone under 18 who is nude?

Really? I just googled Mormons and Child Molesting and got 3,500.000 hits. Teachers and child molesting got 9.800,000 hits, same as Elvis and child molesting. Maybe you need a better scientific method than "There's a lot of hits on google, so it must be true"

No, I cited the first ones which popped up, and you've cited, uh... NOTHING, right? It ain't just priests

Ah yes, you mean we chop down the trees and send them to Asia to be processed, and we develop the raw oil, then send it to Asia to be processed? Moooost impressive! Raw logs and bitumen! Those crafty Chinese will never compete with that! New policies I didn't put in original post: No raw logs may be shipped from Canada for any reason. And all oil must be processed within our borders. Yes, you spend several years going through the various delaying actions the Chinese put up, you win, and they stop... for a month or two, then they start again, in a very slightly altered way, and you spend another several years trying to get them to stop again... and so on. Rinse/repeat. Constant discussion of the West’s simultaneous distrust of and interdependence with China has not changed China’s economic behavior. There is a slew of unaddressed grievances, including China’s indigenous innovation policies, copyright infringements, violations of its World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement, and exchange rate manipulation that go against every standard for international trade. Now a new concern has sprung up, which might top all other grievances. The latest apprehension focuses on the spillover effect caused by China’s violations of WTO agreements, its refusal to play by international rules, and its bullying of trade partners while downplaying its mercantilist behavior. Many countries, be they industrial or developing nations, might conclude that if China gets away with mercantilism and other activities, why can’t we? China trade violation spillover True. Except not with China. The American government doesn't give a damn what is or is not in the best interests of America. The congressmen, senators and yes, the occupant of the White House only really care about the truck loads of money being poured over them by American corporations which are terrified the Chinese will simply seize their investments in China. As for the Canadian government, Harper used to have the right idea, but he's Mr. Pragmatist, and is going to do what Canadian corporations and the opposition want, which is bend his knee to China and look the other way at their trade violatins lest he offend them.