Is slavery a good idea?

[Argus]

I am guessing it is because we are all free men and women?

Progression not regression.That sort of thing.

Do all people deserve to be free? What about those who don't know how to properly take care of themselves, or those who are a danger to others, those who misuse their freedoms? Are there not cases where slavery would be a better response than prison, or being stashed on welfare for your entire life?

[Argus]

We already know that you have a problem with gays and lesbians being free from discrimination, French-speaking Canadians receiving equal services,

I don't have a problem with any of those things. I think you have a problem with what was obviously an inadequate education and a clearly subliterate comprehension of what people write.

As many of us have stated, if slavery is such a good idea, volunteer to become a slave.

I'm curious. Did you really think it was necessary for you to reply to my post by writing the exact same thing you already admit other people have written? I mean, it silly and cliched in the first place, so why you still felt the need to echo... echo... echo the same words is beyond me.

[guyser]

Do all people deserve to be free?

Yes. Barring criminals who have been convicted or those held for criminal charges and immigration.

What about those who don't know how to properly take care of themselves, or those who are a danger to others, those who misuse their freedoms? Are there not cases where slavery would be a better response than prison, or being stashed on welfare for your entire life?

Those who cannot take care of themselves are supported by social services but they are still free men and woman. A danger to others means the court has adjudicated that they be held until they can no longer be a threat.

Slavery a better response than prison.....? No, there are no instances I can think of where that would be true.

Nobody owns anyone. We got over that silly notion a long time ago.

[CANADIEN]

I don't have a problem with any of those things. I think you have a problem with what was obviously an inadequate education and a clearly subliterate comprehension of what people write.

Less we forget... less than three months ago, you were praising a care provider that threathened to pull its services to a disadvantaged group unless they could discriminate aagainst gays anbd lesbians, competed with homophobic clichés. Less we forget... you have "no problem" with the rights of French-seaking Canadians,, unless when it involves services in locations where "they understand English anyway". Inadequate understanding of your own drivel is your problem... most be an indequate education.

I'm curious. Did you really think it was necessary for you to reply to my post by writing the exact same thing you already admit other people have written? I mean, it silly and cliched in the first place, so why you still felt the need to echo... echo... echo the same words is beyond me.

Why? Because you need to be reminded again and again that you do not have the guts to take responsibility for your idea by applying it to yourself. And because you need to be reminded again and again that decent human being know that your idea is disgusting.

What is silly is that you believe you can put such an inhumane notion forward and expect people to approve.

Edited July 19, 2008 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

Why stop at slavery? Why not just kill those who won't work, and charge their family for the bullet? Would save you money, Argus, and we all know you value your wallet more than other people and their human dignity.

[AngusThermopyle]

Why stop at slavery? Why not just kill those who won't work, and charge their family for the bullet? Would save you money, Argus, and we all know you value your wallet more than other people and their human dignity.

What a silly idea. If we did that we wouldn't have the challenged ones such as yourself to "debate" with. Where would the fun be in that? The world needs a certain amount of idiots simply for the amusement value they offer.

[CANADIEN]

What a silly idea. If we did that we wouldn't have the challenged ones such as yourself to "debate" with. Where would the fun be in that? The world needs a certain amount of idiots simply for the amusement value they offer.

Of course it is a silly idea. Belongs right there with the notion that slavery is a good solution to some of our social and economic problems. By the way, do you have something to contribute to the topic of the thread, or are you just trolling because I am a Frenchie? Mind you, the Saturday morning idiocy is very entertaining.

[Argus]

Less we forget... less than three months ago, you were praising a care provider that threathened to pull its services to a disadvantaged group unless they could discriminate aagainst gays anbd lesbians,

No, I actually wasn't. But I do understand where someone with a simplistic understanding of life and poor comprehension skills might be mistaken into thinking that.

Less we forget... you have "no problem" with the rights of French-seaking Canadians,, unless when it involves services in locations where "they understand English anyway".

Translation: I see no point in spending millions on translating everything into French where there are hardly any French around to read it, and where they all speak English anyway.

You'll understand such thoughts better if you ever succeed in life and become a taxpayer.

Why? Because you need to be reminded again and again that you do not have the guts to take responsibility for your idea by applying it to yourself.

If I become a lazy welfare bum then I think that would be an apt statement. As it is, well, I forgive you your inadequacies.

And because you need to be reminded again and again that decent human being know that your idea is disgusting.

Well I can think of any number of people, all of them smarter than you, who would disagree. But again, seeing as probably you and most of those you know are on welfare, I can understand why you'd complain.

[CANADIEN]

No, I actually wasn't. But I do understand where someone with a simplistic understanding of life and poor comprehension skills might be mistaken into thinking that.

The way your were insulting every one who knew the service agency was wrong and the way you were ranting about gays and lesbians make it very clear what your opinion was. So is your habit of hurling insults at anyone who dares to have the conscience so badly lacking in you.

Translation: I see no point in spending millions on translating everything into French where there are hardly any French around to read it, and where they all speak English anyway.

Real translation... you and your money are first class Canadians, I am a second class Canadian.

You'll understand such thoughts better if you ever succeed in life and become a taxpayer.

I have a job, I make more than the avarage Canadian, and you have not proved yet that as a Frenchie I was exempt from income tax.

As for success. You measure success by the size of one's wallet, you are prejudiced, and you favour slavery. That's failure as a human being.

If I become a lazy welfare bum then I think that would be an apt statement. As it is, well, I forgive you your inadequacies.

I can forgive you for not having the guts to prove to all, through personally experiencing it, that slavery is a good thing for those who are enslaved. What I will not do is leave you off the hook for your failure to take responsibilities for your own disgusting idea.

Well I can think of any number of people, all of them smarter than you, who would disagree. But again, seeing as probably you and most of those you know are on welfare, I can understand why you'd complain.

Well. Decent people, no matter how smart they are, know what slavery is, and they don't even have to experience it. If you knew what decency is, you would not advocate slavery.

[CANADIEN]

I think slavery is a great idea Argus and I now designate you as my personal slave. Is there anybody here who will help me whip Argus if he does not do what I tell him?

Now now... Whipping should be only used as a consentual form of sexual stimulation. There is nothing stimulating in what you suggest.

[CANADIEN]

A few quotes about what slavery is:

It is a sin against the dignity of persons and their fundamental rights to reduce them by violence to their productive value or to a source of profit.

(Catechism of the Catholic Church)

(...) crimes that deprive countless victims of their liberty, dignity and human rights

(from a statement by the Secretary General of the United Nations, in 2007)

one of the greatest crimes of history

(George W. Bush)

Any power must be an enemy of mankind which enslaves the individual by power and by force

(Albert Einstein)

[Wilber]

Well, I don't know where you live, but I can pretty much guarantee there are many, many healthy young people in your city on welfare doing pretty much nothing but drinking, doing drugs and fornicating. Perhaps we could find a way to have one of them do your yard work.

No thanks, the wife frowns on drinking, doing drugs and fornicating in the yard.

[WIP]

A few quotes about what slavery is:

(Catechism of the Catholic Church)

(from a statement by the Secretary General of the United Nations, in 2007)

(George W. Bush)

(Albert Einstein)

I was going to ignore this whole thread since Argus just seems to be interested in practicing his rhetorical skills by arguing indefensible positions, but since it's still alive, it's worth asking why, after centuries or millenia of general opinion that some people did not deserve personal rights and freedoms, and deserved to be the property of others -- what changed in peoples minds to decide that everyone, even the lower classes, deserved the same rights and freedoms as the privileged?

[Argus]

The way your were insulting every one who knew the service agency was wrong and the way you were ranting about gays and lesbians make it very clear what your opinion was.

Again we have this poor comprehension of yours. You really ought to work on that if you can. I insult people who are insulting. As for the discussion in question. My take on it had nothing to do with whether their action was sensible or right, merely that it was better to have a religious group taking care of the disabled than have no one. Your priority was respect for homosexuals above all else. My priority was treating the severely disabled.

Real translation... you and your money are first class Canadians, I am a second class Canadian.

Hey, you finally got one right!

As for success. You measure success by the size of one's wallet, you are prejudiced, and you favour slavery.

I have not stated how I measures success, nor even that I'm in favour of slavery.

I can forgive you for not having the guts to prove to all, through personally experiencing it, that slavery is a good thing for those who are enslaved. What I will not do is leave you off the hook for your failure to take responsibilities for your own disgusting idea.

Oh quit blubbering and grow up.

[Argus]

It is a sin against the dignity of persons and their fundamental rights to reduce them by violence to their productive value or to a source of profit.

Let me ask this: How much dignity does a crack whore have? How much dignity does an alcoholic who sleeps on park benches have? What fundamental rights should a serial rapist enjoy? What productive value is there in being on welfare ones entire life?

[Argus]

I was going to ignore this whole thread since Argus just seems to be interested in practicing his rhetorical skills by arguing indefensible positions, but since it's still alive, it's worth asking why, after centuries or millenia of general opinion that some people did not deserve personal rights and freedoms, and deserved to be the property of others -- what changed in peoples minds to decide that everyone, even the lower classes, deserved the same rights and freedoms as the privileged?

Very difficult to say. The French Revolution had a lot to do with making the upper classes worry about what the lower classes were thinking. The plebes were no longer spread out on farms but were jammed into large and threatening groups in the cities. Britain abolished slavery before they had a real democracy, and the opponents of slavery tended to come, at least at that time, from the mid to upper classes. Well, no one else got to vote or be an MP, right? So it had to. The earliest opponents were religious people, quakers, in fact. So I think the established religions coming to believe in the dignity of the individual, and that all individuals needed to be treated with respect as God's creatures, had a lot to do with it. Throw in that the industrial revolution meant the peasantry had to be a little better educated, and that brute man power was no longer as needed as it once was. It's no coincidence, I think, that slavery still survives primarily in areas where brute manpower is still considered economically important, ie third world rat holes, and where there are a lot of completely uneducated and culturally unsophisticated people.

[CANADIEN]

Again we have this poor comprehension of yours. You really ought to work on that if you can. I insult people who are insulting. As for the discussion in question. My take on it had nothing to do with whether their action was sensible or right, merely that it was better to have a religious group taking care of the disabled than have no one. Your priority was respect for homosexuals above all else. My priority was treating the severely disabled.

Nice try. Only fools would buy it.

I have not stated how I measures success(...)

But you claim that I would understand things better if I had succeeded in life and become a taxpayer. Rather tough to miss what you mean by success.

nor even that I'm in favour of slavery.

Go read your original posting again. You are clearly advocating slavery, which means you are favourable to it.

Edited July 20, 2008 by CANADIEN

[CANADIEN]

Let me ask this: How much dignity does a crack whore have? How much dignity does an alcoholic who sleeps on park benches have?

A crack whore is a human being. An alcoholic who sleeps of a park bench is a human being. They have the same basic dignity as other human beings, and the same fundamental right to be treated as persons, instead of objects. Slavery treats persons as objects.

What fundamental rights should a serial rapist enjoy?

Even the most odious criminals are human beings, and have the right to be treated as such. Anybody wants to start a thread about which rights can and cannot be curtailed for prisoners, I'll decide if I want to join.

What productive value is there in being on welfare ones entire life?

Productive value? Sorry, I didn't realize we were talking about cars or farm land. I thought we were talking about human beings.

[Leafless]

A crack whore is a human being. An alcoholic who sleeps of a park bench is a human being.

A crack whore or a transient alcoholic are not part of a productive society.

The country would not be functionable if we were all crack whores or transient alcoholics or similar.

They have the same basic dignity as other human beings, and the same fundamental right to be treated as persons, instead of objects. Slavery treats persons as objects.

Get over most humans are objects or pawns and yes are slaves to the system.

A crack whore or transient alcoholic are worthy of nothing especially honour or respect.

Even the most odious criminals are human beings, and have the right to be treated as such.

Human beings-NO.

Sub-human, YES and do not qualify to be treated as a human being.

There must be a distinction and rewards for being a productive member of a modern society.

Productive value? Sorry, I didn't realize we were talking about cars or farm land. I thought we were talking about human beings.

Cars or farm land have no productive value without productive people (human beings).

[CANADIEN]

A crack whore or a transient alcoholic are not part of a productive society.

The country would not be functionable if we were all crack whores or transient alcoholics or similar.

Get over most humans are objects or pawns and yes are slaves to the system.

A crack whore or transient alcoholic are worthy of nothing especially honour or respect.

Human beings-NO.

Sub-human, YES and do not qualify to be treated as a human being.

There must be a distinction and rewards for being a productive member of a modern society.

Cars or farm land have no productive value without productive people (human beings).

Interesting, but not surprising... you are using a Nazi concept, that of sub-humans.

I'll grant you something, though, some human beings are slave to their prejudices... you are a prime example.

Now back to the issue at hand. Do you agree with Argus' proposal, yes or no?

[WIP]

Very difficult to say. The French Revolution had a lot to do with making the upper classes worry about what the lower classes were thinking. The plebes were no longer spread out on farms but were jammed into large and threatening groups in the cities. Britain abolished slavery before they had a real democracy, and the opponents of slavery tended to come, at least at that time, from the mid to upper classes. Well, no one else got to vote or be an MP, right? So it had to.

A big part of the reason why middleclass and wealthy non-aristocrats opposed slavery, or the European equivalent - 'serfdom' - was because they gained their wealth independently through the skills they learned and practiced, not by owning land and indentured servants. A tradesmen might unfairly enrich himself from the work of his poorly paid apprentices, but it would only be temporary, since once his apprentice had learned the skills of carpentry, tailoring, metal-working etc., he could go and set up his own shop in competition to his former boss. The tradesmen and bankers who started overtaking the land-owning aristocrats in wealth, may not have been any more generous than the lords, knights, dukes, and earls who previously had complete control during the age of Feudalism; if they needed labourers, they just wanted to hire them for their work -- they had no interest in having complete ownership of their source of labour. This is ofcourse, an oversimplification of the issue, since many middleclass tradesmen purchased land and mansions with household servants; but in general, they favoured a flexible society over feudalism, where people could move up or down the social ladder, depending on their abilities and goals in life.

The earliest opponents were religious people, quakers, in fact. So I think the established religions coming to believe in the dignity of the individual, and that all individuals needed to be treated with respect as God's creatures, had a lot to do with it.

Outside of Pennsylvania, you can't really classify the Quakers as the established religion anywhere! The abolitionist churches tended to be the upstart Methodists, along with the fringe churches - Quakers and Unitarians - the established churches in the South did what religious leaders usually do during times of social upheaval -- they sided with and became accomplices for the established order:

from: "The Peculiar Institution" by Kenneth Stamp

...when southern clergy became ardent defenders of slavery, the master class could look upon organized religion as an ally ...the gospel, instead of becoming a mean of creating trouble and strive, was really the best instrument to preserve peace and good conduct among the negroes.

The writings of Christian pro-slavery advocates pretty much disappeared after the Civil War, since "history is written by the victors", but I found this site online which contains a lot of writings of the abolitionists during the Antebellum period; this is from an abolitionist book written in 1852, and I get a kick out of the vitriolic language used to describe his pro-slavery adversaries, and it's staggering, how long the list is! It's pretty much clear that the slaveholders had their own bible-quoting ministers in tow, to provide scriptural justification for their side:

List of Anti-Slavery Clergy, Etc., in Rev. Wm.

Goodell's Slavery and Anti-Slavery, pages 27-31, and

agreement with Rev. Patton's concept, pages 557-558.

The Cold-Hearted U.S. Clergy:

Demonized, Lust-Filled, Heathen,

Unconverted, Atheists,

The Worst Clergy in History,

Proslavery Accessories of Devils:

As Whittier Says:

"their very names shall be

Vile before all the people"

American Bible Society American & Foreign Bible Society

President Spencer H. Cone Rev. Robert N. Anderson Dr. Blagden Rev. Alexander Campbell Dr. Durbin Rev. Dr. A. J. Few Rev. Dr. Wilbur Fisk Rev. George W. Freeman

and Bishop Levi S. Ives Rev. Dr. Richard Fuller Rev. Dr. Richard Furman Bishop Elijah Hedding Prof. Hodge Charles C. Jones Dr. George Junkin Rev. Thomas Malthus Bishop William Meade Dr. S. Olin P B R writer Rev. J. C. Postell Rev. S. G. Roszell Savannah River Baptist

Association of Ministers James Shannon Professor E. D. Simms Rodney "Gipsy" Smith Bishop Soule Prof. Moses Stuart Dr. Taylor Pres. S. C. Thornton Rev. Joseph Tracy Dr. Tyng Dr. Francis Wayland Dr. Winans Rev. Dr. Wisner Rev. Dr. Witherspoon Editor Leonard Woods, Jr. Clergymen Who Pretended

the Constitution Was Pro-Slavery Clergymen Who Pretended the Bible

Is Pro-Slavery Clergymen Who Denounced Emancipation / Blacks Clergymen Refusing Slaves

the Gospel Clergymen Lusting for

Concubines for Themselves Such clergymen are the 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 and Matthew 23:13 and 15 type.

http://medicolegal.tripod.com/patton1846.htm#listvileclergy

Throw in that the industrial revolution meant the peasantry had to be a little better educated, and that brute man power was no longer as needed as it once was. It's no coincidence, I think, that slavery still survives primarily in areas where brute manpower is still considered economically important, ie third world rat holes, and where there are a lot of completely uneducated and culturally unsophisticated people.

Many historians have pointed out that slavery keeps a society static and unable to change when needed to accomodate new technologies or social pressures. The Southern states were actually impoverished by their upholding of slavery, since it stood in the way of the industrialization that was going on in the North, and made fighting the Civil War a futile cause, since the South couldn't match the economic output supporting the northern war effort.

An ancient historian, I can't recall the name of now, stated a number of years ago, that the Ancient Greeks could have started the industrial revolution 2,500 years ago if it wasn't for slavery! The brilliant inventions of Greek scientists such as Archimedes and Hero were mostly unapplied because slave-owners felt cheap labour made their machines unnecessary. The best example was the "Aeolipile" invented by Hero of Alexander -- this early steam engine could have found numerous applications if the Greeks had thought about the advantage of using machines to do work, instead of cheap labour! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile

[Rue]

.. anti-china organizations funded website.

...Though, Titled with The International Labor Organization (ILO) sounds great, just as CIA and International Atomic Energy Agency ever said that Sadaam was making atomic bomb or they told us today no such things happened.

..Rue, I know you and almost everyone here may have fully confidence on your system's correctness and fairness

....And do you think it is "political-correct" that almost every discuss I ever joined, would eventually become a "China fault beating" farce far away from its original topic.....

---"whatever you would say you are wrong because you are a Jew"?

In regards to comment 1, the information I gave is not CIA propaganda, not everyone who criticizes China is an imperialist yankee and I dliberately quoted a socialist union organization. No I do not quote things that are against Chinese people, just specific government policies-my debate is over specific Chinese policies, not Chinese people..and no I do not think criticizing the Chinese Communist Party and its government is an attack against Chinese people. I think with due respect its not accurate to say because I criticize specific policies I am anti-Chinese. I am not anti anyone-now its policies and government approaches, uest I I can't stand many of them-as for people-I hate all people equally- I only like dogs and cats and birds and animals.

I apologize I did not mean to stear the topic off point. It may have been more appropriate under another heading and you are perfectly right-it does appear I am singling out China for being a slave nation-for the record I responded to you and I have problems with many countries and their policies not just China.

In regards to your last comment about Jews that was with due respect dumb. At no time did I engage in gross negative generalizations about Chinese people as do some posters when they claim to criticize Israeli policy but in fact engage in negative stereotypes about Israelis and Jews.

I do not criticize people for criticizing Israeli policies-I do tie my colon in a knot when people engage in anti-semitic or anti-Israeli as people references just as I would expect you to if I said racist things about Chinese people.

For the record, I think the government of China and the Communist Party of China are in my opinion are problematic.

Also for the record, no I do not think since you brought it up, that as a Jew or a Canadian, I am perfect or that the Canadian system is perfect but I would take the Canadian way of life including its values and political system over anything China has to offer at the current time thank you very much.

No I would not feel comfortable in the way I was brought up as a "Jew" or a "Canadian" engaging in the kinds of business and other practices I see engaged in, in China. But no I do not think I am superior to anyone nor am I such a zealout that I am going to invade China and force people to eat Maple Syrup.

XUL just so you know my mother was born in the Jewish community in Shanghai, and survived the Japanese and went to medical school there before she left as a refugee to Canada. I know all about how the Chinese were kind to Jews leading up to and during World War Two in Shanghai and what the Japanese did and what Mao did too. My bias comes from particular Taoist beliefs not being anti-Chinese. But I don't blame you for accusing me of bias because I am and I most certainly do have cultural biases not just political ones. Of course.

Now getting back to the topic, yah slavery is wrong and I have issues with it. My people have always had a problem with it. My great great great grand-father Moses was a trade unionist had problems with slavery and led others of my kind out of Egypt because of unsafe work conditionst. It has been causing us problems ever since we left and started a nation of our own so we would no longer have to be slaves. In retrospect despite all the misunderstandings none of us want to go back to Egypt and work for free. That is why so many of us do stand up comedy now. Its more fun.

I like the Jamaican attitude about slavery. When the british tried enslave the Jamaicans they simply said, "you crazy man" and headed to the mountains and still make great coffee up there not to mention if anyone tries to come to Jamaica today and boss them around they just say "soon come".

Edited July 21, 2008 by Rue

[xul]

XUL just so you know my mother was born in the Jewish community in Shanghai, and survived the Japanese and went to medical school there before she left as a refugee to Canada. I know all about how the Chinese were kind to Jews leading up to and during World War Two in Shanghai and what the Japanese did and what Mao did too. My bias comes from particular Taoist beliefs not being anti-Chinese. But I don't blame you for accusing me of bias because I am and I most certainly do have cultural biases not just political ones. Of course.

Rue, first you must understand, China was and is a developing country with large number of population and vast territory, so the development and even the culture in different areas are very different. Shanghai was the bigest and the most modern city in China and its culture was westernized when your mother was there. You could not suppose that the Chinese your mother met were the representative of the majority of Chinese at that time. The population of Shanghai was only 5 million and the population of peasants was 500 million.

Mao and his CPC army were not some ET came from outer space. He was the representative of Chinese majority, the peasant class. Just as those peasants, Mao had never been abroad except visited Soviet once in his time. I'm not sure, would you think Mao hated Israel or anti-Israeli? LOL. At least in 1950s, I think Mao even didn't know where Israel locates in a map. What he did just due to several pages of paper with a list of which countries still kept diplomatic relations with Taiwan, where his enemy Jiang and his KMT government fled to.

Now getting back to the topic, yah slavery is wrong and I have issues with it. My people have always had a problem with it. My great great great grand-father Moses was a trade unionist had problems with slavery and led others of my kind out of Egypt because of unsafe work conditionst. It has been causing us problems ever since we left and started a nation of our own so we would no longer have to be slaves. In retrospect despite all the misunderstandings none of us want to go back to Egypt and work for free. That is why so many of us do stand up comedy now. Its more fun.

I don't think slavery is simply "wrong" or "good". In fact, slavery had ever been better, than the system before it---which is supposed to kill all prisoners of war instead of keeping them as slaves. By the way, I think Moses led "your kind" out of Egypt just because "your kind" were not the slaveholders in Egypt, not because your ancestors were "up" than others when slaveholding was the main form of the systems in this stage of human history ---no offence to "your kind", I just belong to those guys who can hardly agree to use modern moral criterian to blame or sugar up ancient people.

Edited July 23, 2008 by xul

[M.Dancer]

While slavery itself has shown itself over and over again as a inefficient economic model I can't help think that inmates of our federal prisons sitting idle is just a monumental waste.

Now I would not want convicts toiling away so that in the end their labours compete against privately owned businesses....but it strikes me that on one hand we have little over 32,000 individuals who have a debt to society.....and on the other hand an arctic that needs sovereignty assertion....what better way to assert our claim than to establish colonies and at the same time motivate prisoners to learn no trades and to avail themselves at the chance to be leaders of their communities (of fellow penal colonists). What true Canadian murderer wouldn't jump at an opportunity to spend trhe remainer of his days not behind bars but instead on Resolute Island ( or where ever) engaged in labour that in the end works towrds his survival?

There may be losses as the lazy and the week might succumb to exposure or malnutrition but in the end, as Australia has shown, a harsh environment will winnow the population and in a few generation the crucible of the arctic we give us a population, descendents of convicts unafraid of hard work and perhaps with a cute marketable accent to boot.

Edited July 29, 2008 by M.Dancer

[HisSelf]

When you start paying for my bills rather than the reverse, as I suspect is now the case, you can put forth that case.

I have a piece of cardboard down by the furnace you can sleep on. For food, I will let you take out the garbage. Don't tell me you'll be ungrateful.

I pay my own bills, Argus. I am an independent businessman and have been for the past ten years. I do not qualify for unemployment insurance and I pay double the Canada Pension Plan of anybody who is employed by a company.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, chum.

Edited July 29, 2008 by HisSelf