H10 Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 1 minute ago, ?Impact said: Certainly that is one way, but how do you distribute the money? Does that mean the the few Haitians that put their name on the Internet receive millions and others nothing? How do you build schools, hospitals, etc. with this money? Are these individuals taxed on what they receive? Your intent is right, but I don't think practical. I agree there is a practical issue. Most likely, the most practical way would be to work through government registries and whatever money raised (lets say it is raised privately on a crowdfunding type website) would be distributed to the people in the affected areas via cheque. Or of course,this would be many many people. I would not worry about building schools or hospitals. Mainly because those don't get build with traditional aid and Haiti has tons of issues with land ownership laws that make building these very hard where they are not already established. The real issue is actually people not having money to pay for hospitals or education rather than the empty buildings. Individuals with money can choose to pool their money to build schools or they can choose to pay school fees for their kids in existing schools. I guess taxation would depend on Haitian tax law, which I would not pretend to understand, these are essentially donations, so ultimately it would enter the tax system I'd imagine through sales taxes or land taxes or someone's income. The one thing that is certain, is that giving any organization a large sum of money and hoping they distribute it to poor people will simply lead to graft, corruption and outright theft. Even in other countries where infrastructure is built, it is largely useless. The locals won't have money to pay the staff, or don't have money to pay the school fees, or don't have money to buy the medicine, or to pay for it, or to rent the hospital beds, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benz Posted November 29, 2016 Report Share Posted November 29, 2016 5 minutes ago, hernanday said: You are the one who said Quebec should be unilingual French, why should English Canada maintain French if you don't want to maintain English? Seems hypocritical. French has been banned in which public schools? Not in Ontario, we got tons of French immersion schools here and tons of French classes that are mandated and most students hate to take because it is useless for 99% of them. If Quebec leaves Canada, ain't no way in hell we are going to keep French as an official language in the ROC, especially Ontario, can't speak for NB as they have a large 30% french minority, I'm not sure how realistic it is. However there is just no reason to keep French as an official language for 500,000 Franco-ontarians who are almost all bilingual. Ontario bilingualism is done simply to appease quebec. Why can't french parents send their kids to french schools? I never said Québec should be unilingual french. You better question your own sources. I see in the other thread what you think is the situation of the english language in Québec and you behave like if you are coming from an alternate reality. French is useless for kids? That's not what I see. English is useless because even when we are explaining you in english, you still do not understand. Therefore, the problem is english. Stop teaching english to your kids and they will become more intelligent. Seriously, there are tons of matter thaught in school that may not be useful later. They need to learn and too bad if they can't remember everything. Studies demonstrate that it is good for the brain to know more than one language. Do you care about your own kids or what? Assume what you are. You care shit about your own people. Your fellow french citizens have no respect from you. The only reason you allow them to get some french services, is because you want to appease another province, according to your own words. Definitely, we are not all canadians to you. Some are more canadians than others. Therefore, hell yeah they should leave your country and join us for their best interests. Here, we are not closed minded and stobborn like you. Even if we seperate, we will still respect the english minority. We do not considere people as third class citizen like you do. Why can't french parents send their kids to french schools? I do not know. Ask your fellow canadians. They are the ones who block them all the time. Look, in PEI, they got their first french school in 2009. But the french are living in that province from the beginning. The Acadians were living in NS, NB and PEI way before the dominion of Canada entity was created. Even if the french wanted to send their children to french schools, the autorities never allowed them. They fought in the Supreme Court in 2000 and they won. Only in 2009 they finally got their real first school. How pathetic! Today, it is not as worst as it was 10 years ago. But there is still some progress to do. Recently, the french in BC had to fight to the court again so their schools can get the same quality level as the english ones. The french schools were too crowded, had less services and funds than the english ones. When there are no schools, you pretend that it is because there are not enough people. When the french finally force you with the court to have schools, they are too crowded because too popular and you keep giving them lack of funding that the englis ones get without a problem. The french always have to fight, fight, fight, fight and fight, over and over. The french do not get your respect unless they force you by the court to get it. Now look at you. If Québec leaves, you think you will be able to stop what the french gain by fighting very hard for it. They did not give up in more than 100 years, they will not stop now. You are making them more easy to join Québec than fighting again to keep the minimum of respect in your own country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 On 11/28/2016 at 7:15 PM, Benz said: A position attributed according to your genetics, which totally immoral in my republican values. I will point out that there is a bit of irony in using a Quebec flag avatar, a flag which is a combination of the Christian cross and a symbol of the French monarchy, while preaching republican values. 5 hours ago, Benz said: Their culture of corruption is the direct outcome of voting liberals no matter what. It's what 100% of the anglos vote here. I thought a fair amount of anglophone Quebecers voted for the CAQ last election. Am I mistaken? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benz Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said: I will point out that there is a bit of irony in using a Quebec flag avatar, a flag which is a combination of the Christian cross and a symbol of the French monarchy, while preaching republican values. I thought a fair amount of anglophone Quebecers voted for the CAQ last election. Am I mistaken? Unfortunatly and that is very sad, the anglos here still vote 99% for the liberals. The CAQ gets supports only among french. The Québec liberals today have Nothing in common with the former liberals of the 60-70-80-90's. They are not liberals, they are just corrupted people who can't do anything for the people. Whatever they do, it is too serve their interests and their "friends". Whenever I ask them why they do that, the answer is always the same. The only thing that matter, is to vote against the majority of the french people. To vote for party that is the most against seperation. They would vote for a goat if it was a liberal. The french are divided among the left, the center, the right, the separatists, the federalists... but the English are just for one party and nothing else. Even Saddam hussein could not get that much success by cheating. It's even true with the federal élections. The french are divided. The majority goes with NDP, the second choice is the Bloc. But among the anglos, it's only the liberals and nothing else. The very few conservatives are from french conservatives. Good point for the flag, you are right. The origin of the flag is not very representative of the republican values. When I was young, the teacher told us that the 4 lys is for the 4 seasons and the lys is for our french origins. Of course, it is not true. It's Duplessi's choice to preach of the supreme christianity. Alot of people have redefined the symbols for their our agenda. It's later that I learned the truth. The people prefer chaning its menaing than changing the symbols. I think the Québécois do not care much about that because they already lost their real original symbols anyway. Our name was canadien and our symbol was the three maple leafs. the English did not want to recognize our nation, so they took ours and say, "see, we are the same now". It worked for a while. the people who were attached to those symbols did not change until their death. But the youth could not swallow it. This is why we change our name from canadiens to québécois and use the lys instead of the maple leaf. Even the current canadian national anthem was created by Québec nationlists, called Canadiens back then. The history of Canada is loaded with irony. Someday when I had few time to kill and I was also thinking about what would be our flag if I do it from scratch. Something representative of us. I came up with this attached file. White for peace and winter. Blue triangle for our mains river that cuts our land in two. The motor of our development. The green maple leaf for our canadien origin, those we became when we colonized this land with the help of the natives. Then the lys because I think we are just too used to it. but I could remove it and move the maple leaf there instead and it would still be ok to me. QuébecFictif.bmp <img src="QuébecFictif.bmp" alt="Québec fictive flag" > Edited November 30, 2016 by Benz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTM Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) 18 hours ago, taxme said: French may be one of our official languages in this country but french is only used in Quebec, and in parts of New Brunswick, but not in the rest of Canada. Quebec is not a country, it is a province, and therefore Canada should not be seen or known as a french speaking country although that seems to be the impression that our fake and phony politicians like to give. There was no referendum done to see if Canadians wanted to make french an official language of Canada. It was just forced on them by a dictator. French is the language of one of the founding groups of Canada, is spoken by to some degree by nearly third of the population (mother tongue of somewhat less than a quarter), and was enshrined by law as an official language nearly 50 years ago (through the terms of 9 different governments). Canada is a French speaking nation. Edited November 30, 2016 by TTM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxme Posted November 30, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 8 hours ago, Benz said: It would not save you billions per year. I already explained you why your reasoning does not compute. I actually considere useless to force companies to use french on cereal boxes while at the same time, even if they won at the supreme court, alot of french parents still can't send their children to french schools. The way you think is singular to north america. No where else in the world, providing translation is seen as something bad. On the countrary, it is a sign of mastering language skills and it gives a strong image of you. But not you. Nope, you prefer to have the most insipid environment. The Queen and all her family does perfectly speak french by the way. I understand that for you, french is crap. It is your legitimated right to think so. But you are not alone in this country and whether you like it or not, you have to share with the french people. If you don't then invite the french to take their share of land and leave your federation. This how it works. It is totally ironic and very stupid that you blame us for the multiculturalism. It is YOUR multiculturalism. It is the same one that appears in all anglos countries. UK, USA, Australia, name it. In Quebec, we prefer the pluriculturalism, like in France and non-anglos countries. Trudeau is an english mindset. Whether he is born in Québec or Kenya does not change a damn thing. You are in total denial. Ontario has the biggest amoung of french behind Québec. St-Boniface (Manitoba) has the biggest french community outside Québec. NB has the biggest french ratio behind Québec. Although french has been banned in most public schools for over a century, they managed to survive and they are not all assimilated. So here is the deal, either you try to ban french again until there are none left with the consequences that go with it, or you stop your bullshit and respect them like simple other human being. Whining about their existance won't lead you anywhere. Fais-toi à l'idée mon grand. Oh and by the way, if the french of NB and Ontario do not leave Canada to join Québec, you will still have to keep french as the official language. Regarding the corruption in Quebec, 99% of it comes from the federalists. The ones that love so much Canada that they prefer to stay in the status quo rather than give full power to the people.They are what I hate the most about politic. You want to talk about those bastards? Be my guess. Their culture of corruption is the direct outcome of voting liberals no matter what. It's what 100% of the anglos vote here. Go ahead and explain me what you think about your own fellows that are supporting the corrupted pro-canada government in Quebec. You call things the way you see it with your myopic vision. That's what you do. I will keep bringing in your face the truth that you do not want to see. You won't even be able to blame your tax dollars for it. It's free. I don't know why the Anglophones in Quebec bother to vote for anyone political party in Quebec. None of them give a dam about the Anglos in Quebec. Even in Ottawa the Anglophone politicians don't give a dam about them either. Sad to say but they care more for refugees and their rights and helping them than they do about the Anglos of Quebec. Our Anglophone leaders in Ottawa are either too cowardly to speak up for the Anglos of Quebec or they are just to politically correct to say anything. Like you said french has survived and would have still survived without Quebec declaring itself unilingual french. All Quebec had to do was make it a law that everything done in Quebec shall be in both official languages. But they didn't and this alone shows that Quebec does not want to have anything to do with the English language. If they could they would outlaw English everywhere in Quebec. Again, thanks to father Trudeau the rest of Canada got stuck with bilingualism,multiculturalism,foreign-aid fraud, metric, and massive third world immigration. A book written many decades ago called "Bilingual Today, French Tomorrow" explained how father Trudeau and his gang of henchmen wanted to turn Canada into a french speaking country. Well, it looks like they have come close to succeeding that dream of his. The rest of Canada is bilingual while Quebec is unilingual french. Trudeau hated the British, and this was is way of trying to get rid of what was a part of our Canadian British heritage. I guess that we can go on and on but the short, sweet and simple of it is, go, quebec, go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxme Posted November 30, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 51 minutes ago, TTM said: French is the language of one of the founding groups of Canada, is spoken by to some degree by nearly third of the population (mother tongue of somewhat less than a quarter), and was enshrined by law as an official language nearly 50 years ago (through the terms of 9 different governments). Canada is a French speaking nation. Where do you get this Canada is a french speaking nation nonsense? It is not, it is an English speaking country, and Quebec is a unilingual french speaking province only. Parts of Ontario and New Brunswick are about too or have some french bilingual speaking areas where french is spoken but the rest of Canada speaks English only. And while they go bilingual to please the french, the french refuse to do likewise and will remain a non-bilingual province. They laugh at the rest of Canada. I just hope that the rest of the provinces in Canada don't try to appease Quebec also by starting to put up bilingual signage just to try and appease a province that wants nothing to do with the English language. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxme Posted November 30, 2016 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 7 hours ago, Benz said: I never said Québec should be unilingual french. You better question your own sources. I see in the other thread what you think is the situation of the english language in Québec and you behave like if you are coming from an alternate reality. French is useless for kids? That's not what I see. English is useless because even when we are explaining you in english, you still do not understand. Therefore, the problem is english. Stop teaching english to your kids and they will become more intelligent. Seriously, there are tons of matter thaught in school that may not be useful later. They need to learn and too bad if they can't remember everything. Studies demonstrate that it is good for the brain to know more than one language. Do you care about your own kids or what? Assume what you are. You care shit about your own people. Your fellow french citizens have no respect from you. The only reason you allow them to get some french services, is because you want to appease another province, according to your own words. Definitely, we are not all canadians to you. Some are more canadians than others. Therefore, hell yeah they should leave your country and join us for their best interests. Here, we are not closed minded and stobborn like you. Even if we seperate, we will still respect the english minority. We do not considere people as third class citizen like you do. Why can't french parents send their kids to french schools? I do not know. Ask your fellow canadians. They are the ones who block them all the time. Look, in PEI, they got their first french school in 2009. But the french are living in that province from the beginning. The Acadians were living in NS, NB and PEI way before the dominion of Canada entity was created. Even if the french wanted to send their children to french schools, the autorities never allowed them. They fought in the Supreme Court in 2000 and they won. Only in 2009 they finally got their real first school. How pathetic! Today, it is not as worst as it was 10 years ago. But there is still some progress to do. Recently, the french in BC had to fight to the court again so their schools can get the same quality level as the english ones. The french schools were too crowded, had less services and funds than the english ones. When there are no schools, you pretend that it is because there are not enough people. When the french finally force you with the court to have schools, they are too crowded because too popular and you keep giving them lack of funding that the englis ones get without a problem. The french always have to fight, fight, fight, fight and fight, over and over. The french do not get your respect unless they force you by the court to get it. Now look at you. If Québec leaves, you think you will be able to stop what the french gain by fighting very hard for it. They did not give up in more than 100 years, they will not stop now. You are making them more easy to join Québec than fighting again to keep the minimum of respect in your own country. Sure, worry about french rights outside Quebec, right, while the Anglophone rights in Quebec are ignored by our politicians and the Supreme Court. Quebec laughs at the rest of Canada because they have been taught to believe that without Quebec the rest of Canada will suffer terribly. Out West we will do a lot better without Quebec or Ottawa. We don't need either one of them to continue to tell us as to how we will run ourselves. We will do just fine. It's our own lying phony politically correct politicians and the fake stream media that keep feeding us the doom and gloom scenario. The Anglophones are their own worse enemy. All they seem to want to do is kiss butt, and continue to get shafted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benz Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 20 minutes ago, taxme said: Sure, worry about french rights outside Quebec, right, while the Anglophone rights in Quebec are ignored by our politicians and the Supreme Court. Quebec laughs at the rest of Canada because they have been taught to believe that without Quebec the rest of Canada will suffer terribly. Out West we will do a lot better without Quebec or Ottawa. We don't need either one of them to continue to tell us as to how we will run ourselves. We will do just fine. It's our own lying phony politically correct politicians and the fake stream media that keep feeding us the doom and gloom scenario. The Anglophones are their own worse enemy. All they seem to want to do is kiss butt, and continue to get shafted. Taxme, this discussion we have you and me is not about the politics and decisions to take. It's about rewriting the actual reality. I invite you to come here dude. I will show you how much you are wrong. You are so off, it's like living in a parallel world. You deny the facts. You deny the reality. Nothing of what you think come close to what is really going on. It makes you look so ridiculous. Don't you have a little dignity? How does that works for you lately. The answer is only useful for you. If you are so interested to go alone and take your distance from center Canada, then why don't you do it? Québec wants to do it for a very long time now and had proposed many different solutions. Québec is always pushing to give less power to Ottawa and more to the provinces. But the provinces, including your's, are always taking the centralist side. You always shit in our hands when it comes to do what needs to be done. You talk, you talk, but you do shit. Look at your Harper. before he became prime minister, he said so many times that he will decentralize the power, he said so many times that he will drastically change the senate. Not only he did not do it, he enforced it by naming as many conservatives as he can. Harper was just another centralist as any other before him. Oh I sometimes hear loudmouth like you who wants decentralization but, when the time come to do something, you collapse. This is the reputation you have. Fancy talk, little action. You are not reliable. The only thing that interests you, is thinking that whatever happens, it's Québec faults. Québec is responsible for winter, poverty in the world, cancer, AIDS, global warming, women's periods, Justin bieber... you are always using the blame it on Québec card. Québec is never bad enough for you. Your creativity makes you think that the anglos here are living under the nazi oppression. Even when the anglos here are telling you that you are wrong, you just rather think that we brain watched them or they are talking with a gun on their head. You are NOT making a point. You never did, you never will. It is not the reality. English here can use English, can get services from Québec in English, can get schools in English, can have their own hospitals in English, basically, they can live in English and having no clue of what-so-ever of what the french culture is. That is actually a drama because it makes few of them feel like foreigners in their own home. Still, all of them are totally free to live in English and no one ban them to do so. Usually, it is at this very moment that you say another lie "howdy, but they are forbidden to use English in business". And then we have to repeat the same thing over and over. No, they are free to use English as much as they can, but they are forced to serve in french to the french and use french in signs as well. Even when English Quebecers are telling you the truth, you don't care and stay stubborn about it. Because the only thing that matters to you, is to blame Québec and picture us as bad people. You are like a little boy playing cowboys and indians. The English are the good guys, the French are the bad guys. Whenever we tend the hand to you, or try to work on propositions and solutions, whenever we communicate in good faith, it's always the same kind of answer we get in return. You must be living a very sad life to see the world with those glasses. It is actually very sad for you. Do not forget to wake up tonight, you must not waste valuable time to hate me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 26 minutes ago, Benz said: Québec is responsible for winter I have to say I agree with that one. When did the Quebec nationalists switch from canadiens to québécois? I remember hearing that a few times from older people in the 60's but I don't think it was very common even then. b.t.w. your flag image is giving me the following problem: The page you are trying to access is not available for your account. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 3 hours ago, Benz said: Look at your Harper. before he became prime minister, he said so many times that he will decentralize the power, he said so many times that he will drastically change the senate. Not sure if this counts as off-topic, but with respect to decentralization of power, our current system which gives provinces lots of power results in duplication of costs, which makes government overall more expensive, and makes it difficult to coordinate economic, environmental, health and immigration policies. It might make sense to move in the direction of Australia where sub-national divisions have far less power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benz Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 7 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said: Not sure if this counts as off-topic, but with respect to decentralization of power, our current system which gives provinces lots of power results in duplication of costs, which makes government overall more expensive, and makes it difficult to coordinate economic, environmental, health and immigration policies. It might make sense to move in the direction of Australia where sub-national divisions have far less power. If both levels are sticking their noses into the same fields, it is not decentralized. The federal should not stick its nose into health and education. It does not have the skills. Unless the provinces agree to set a canada wide standard. But it would mean that the federal will operate the mandate given by the provinces. Which is not what is happening now. The federal sets its own standard on powers that it has no skills. Are there duplicate powers that should rather go on the federal level instead? Maybe! Maybe the environment? So far, no provinces, including Québec, are disputing powers that are federal exclusive. It's always the other way around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benz Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) 11 hours ago, ?Impact said: I have to say I agree with that one. When did the Quebec nationalists switch from canadiens to québécois? I remember hearing that a few times from older people in the 60's but I don't think it was very common even then. b.t.w. your flag image is giving me the following problem: The page you are trying to access is not available for your account. It was a long process. I remember that my grand parents had the habits to call themselve "Canadiens-Français", even if they considere their nation a different one from the "Canadiens-Anglais". The change started significantly in the 60's and almost only among the young people. That is why it took a while. Between 1840 and 1885, the immigration coming from ireland and scotland prefered to use the identity canadian rather than british. It became so popular that even the british-english eventually adopted it. The english also started to use the expression French canadian to identify the canadiens. When it became obvious that now the english are also naming themselve Canadians, the french also added the extension to their name for "Canadien-Français". It was like that until the 1960's. The french canadians figured out that english canada is not about to recognize their nation any time soon and the need to distinguish themselve became stronger. That is why they adopted the new name, Québécois. As of now, whether you are federalist or independentist, your identity is Québécois in first place. But it is important to understand that Québécois is not an ethnic nation, it is a civic nation. You can be black like chocolate and born in Africa, you can still become a Québécois. While French canadians (and/or Acadiens) are an ethnic nationalism. Québécois has a state, French canadians do not. They are a minority without a status. The only status is their language, which is official at the federal level and in few provinces. It is ironic, because the english canadians are the cause of this name change. Québec was just the name of a city and its identity was limited to the border of that city. The british made it a state. If you go in the past, take a french from 1755, bring him here and explain him that now the british are the Canadians and the french are Québécois, his reaction would be "The world is upside down, WTF happened?". I do not know how to post an image in your forum yet. I will try to figure it out. Edited November 30, 2016 by Benz add Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 21 hours ago, Benz said: "I never said Québec should be unilingual french. You better question your own sources. I see in the other thread what you think is the situation of the english language in Québec and you behave like if you are coming from an alternate reality." French is useless for kids? That's not what I see. English is useless because even when we are explaining you in english, you still do not understand. Therefore, the problem is english. Stop teaching english to your kids and they will become more intelligent. Seriously, there are tons of matter thaught in school that may not be useful later. They need to learn and too bad if they can't remember everything. Studies demonstrate that it is good for the brain to know more than one language. Do you care about your own kids or what? What did I say that makes you think I am in an alternate reality? You were the guy arguing for Quebec having just French as its official language, is that not correct? Where did I say French is useless for kids? Did I make that statement? Or was it in a different context? I said French was useless largely in Ontario for 99% of kids because they will never be able to have any meaningful grasp of the language nor even communicate nor understand the most basic French with other people. And I am person who took French for 4 years of university. It is just not possible for kids to absorb that content in Ontario. They do not have enough interactions with real French speaking natives. They'd learn more French in a 6 month exchange to Quebec than in 9 years of elementary education. Studies demonstrate that children who are taught in a multi-lingual environment have poorer performance and lower aptitudes and test scores than unilingual ones. If we stop teaching English in schools, our children won't speak anything in Ontario. The other point I might add, is what benefit does it serve to French people or Quebec to have French taught in schools in Ontario among the 95% English speaking population. They are not going to learn enough french to ever communicate you. 21 hours ago, Benz said: Assume what you are. You care shit about your own people. Your fellow french citizens have no respect from you. The only reason you allow them to get some french services, is because you want to appease another province, according to your own words. Definitely, we are not all canadians to you. Some are more canadians than others. Therefore, hell yeah they should leave your country and join us for their best interests. Here, we are not closed minded and stobborn like you. Even if we seperate, we will still respect the english minority. We do not considere people as third class citizen like you do. Why can't french parents send their kids to french schools? I do not know. Ask your fellow canadians. They are the ones who block them all the time. Look, in PEI, they got their first french school in 2009. But the french are living in that province from the beginning. The Acadians were living in NS, NB and PEI way before the dominion of Canada entity was created. Even if the french wanted to send their children to french schools, the autorities never allowed them. They fought in the Supreme Court in 2000 and they won. Only in 2009 they finally got their real first school. How pathetic! Today, it is not as worst as it was 10 years ago. But there is still some progress to do. Recently, the french in BC had to fight to the court again so their schools can get the same quality level as the english ones. The french schools were too crowded, had less services and funds than the english ones. When there are no schools, you pretend that it is because there are not enough people. When the french finally force you with the court to have schools, they are too crowded because too popular and you keep giving them lack of funding that the englis ones get without a problem. The french always have to fight, fight, fight, fight and fight, over and over. The french do not get your respect unless they force you by the court to get it. The fact we are paying for French speakers to get services is the respect to the French/Quebec. Go ahead leave, we don't care, we are tired of our tax dollars supporting you and you being bitter about it. Quebekers have the same passport as we do. You want your own country, not my problem, frankly most people I know don't care, it wouldn't affect them except maybe lower taxes and more services, once all the billions we use to support Quebec through transfer payments is erased. I would prefer Quebec stay, like I would prefer all provinces stay, but if Quebec, Alberta, Saskatchewan and or Toronto wants to leave then so be it. I am not begging anyone. You discriminate against aboriginals, against arabs, against chinese, against afro-quebekers, I doubt that you do not treat people as 3rd class citizens. I don't see where Ontario treats people any worse than Quebec. You made an allegation that French parents cannot send their kids to French schools. I have no knowledge of such thing being true, I am asking you a question as to where is this happening. PEI has a small number of French, if the French do not have the numbers to merit a school, that is to support it financially at least numerically, then they should not get a school. You have to have the numbers, otherwise 1 french parent in a 99% anglo speaking community can demand a multi-million dollar school. Isn't NB officially bilingual, it would seem they should have many french schools. Just because someone is taking you to court does not mean they have the numbers, show me evidence there was thousands and thousands of french kids trying to enroll to make french schools I also just skimmed the case and saw of the just 13 communities, only 1 had no school, 3 schools were underfunded but 13 were adequately funded. Have you no understanding that many English schools (particularity catholic) are underfunded as well? And I am guessing that alot of these schools were probably Catholic which is why they were underfunded. Only 1.4% of the BC population is just french speaking only, so no surprise, people don't know they exist. 21 hours ago, Benz said: Now look at you. If Québec leaves, you think you will be able to stop what the french gain by fighting very hard for it. They did not give up in more than 100 years, they will not stop now. You are making them more easy to join Québec than fighting again to keep the minimum of respect in your own country. If Quebec leaves, the constitution will have to be amended. There will be no justification for allowing special goodies for French people when the largest bloc of them have left the country, it makes no sense. You cannot realistically believe the other provinces are even dealing with bilingualism other than for Quebec's existence (except maybe nb). French is not even in the top 5 foreign languages in BC, why would they make so much accommodations for such a tiny population? It is like you are literally insane and believe that just being French should grant you some special status even if the only reason for that status existing (Quebec) leaves the union. I would fully expect Quebec to pretty much become French only if they left the union, they are not offering English services out of kindness but rather as part of a deal with other provinces. Who cares, I'd prefer if all the French people go back to France or Quebec and separate if they are just going to whine about driving up cost for tax payers by not assimilating and getting special language schools that their numbers do not justify. If you are going to live in an English province then just learn English. I'd also recommend those in Quebec to learn french. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benz Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 50 minutes ago, hernanday said: What did I say that makes you think I am in an alternate reality? You were the guy arguing for Quebec having just French as its official language, is that not correct? Yes. But you said that Québec is unilingual, which is not the same thing. Saskatchewan has NO official language. Neither english, nor french are banned. Having French as the unique official language in Québec, does not mean that english has not some recognition. The Official language act of Canada still apply as well and we are ok with that. You get confused between official status and unicity. Despite english is not an official language for the Quebec state, it does have other official recognitions. For instance, education and administration. Even if Québec separates completely, those rights won't vanish because they are in Quebec's rules. 50 minutes ago, hernanday said: Where did I say French is useless for kids? Did I make that statement? Or was it in a different context? I said French was useless largely in Ontario for 99% of kids because they will never be able to have any meaningful grasp of the language nor even communicate nor understand the most basic French with other people. And I am person who took French for 4 years of university. It is just not possible for kids to absorb that content in Ontario. They do not have enough interactions with real French speaking natives. They'd learn more French in a 6 month exchange to Quebec than in 9 years of elementary education. Studies demonstrate that children who are taught in a multi-lingual environment have poorer performance and lower aptitudes and test scores than unilingual ones. If we stop teaching English in schools, our children won't speak anything in Ontario. You are answering yourself. Maybe it's my understanding of english language that is poor, but first you say that you never said useless, then the next line you say it is useless. It is pretty much contradictory to me. Can you say it in french? We observe the same thing here or anywhere else in the world regarding the learning . Just teaching it in a class is not enough. Immersions are necessary to stand still the language skill. Please show me your studies. They are in contradictions with everything else I have seen so far. 50 minutes ago, hernanday said: The other point I might add, is what benefit does it serve to French people or Quebec to have French taught in schools in Ontario among the 95% English speaking population. They are not going to learn enough french to ever communicate you. I did not mention anything about it. I was talking about the french having problems to access french schools. But I already answered your question. There are alot of things that are taught to children and that won't be useful for them later, or at best just few of them. A second language is often one of them. If you think it is not a good thing for your kids to learn a language, even if the odds are very high that they will eventually lose it, that is another issue. Even if I do not desagree with your numbers, I believe you are wrong. But I see it as a different topic and the link with french is just a matter of context. 50 minutes ago, hernanday said: The fact we are paying for French speakers to get services is the respect to the French/Quebec. Go ahead leave, we don't care, we are tired of our tax dollars supporting you and you being bitter about it. Quebekers have the same passport as we do. You want your own country, not my problem, frankly most people I know don't care, it wouldn't affect them except maybe lower taxes and more services, once all the billions we use to support Quebec through transfer payments is erased. I would prefer Quebec stay, like I would prefer all provinces stay, but if Quebec, Alberta, Saskatchewan and or Toronto wants to leave then so be it. I am not begging anyone. See, that is what I am saying to Taxme as well. Look at yourself in the mirror. You allow Franco-Ontarians to have french schools and services, but you do not do it for them. You are doing it for Québec. It means you have no respect for them, you only do it because Québec has a bigger balance of power. Your reasonning says alot about you. No wonder they constantly have to fight over and over. You let it go only when Québec roars. So much for the recognition of the minorities. 50 minutes ago, hernanday said: You discriminate against aboriginals, against arabs, against chinese, against afro-quebekers, I doubt that you do not treat people as 3rd class citizens. I don't see where Ontario treats people any worse than Quebec. I dare you to prove it. I know alot of english medias are telling you that we are the worst nazis in the history. But when you look for yourself, you will see there is nothing true in that crapt. All the aboriginals of Canada are using the agreements we had with the Crees and the Innus as a reference of good relations. It is in Québec that the people have the highest respectful opinion of aboriginals according to Léger & Léger. If you really think that we treat badly the arabs and chineses and blacks, be my guess and prove it. Any worst than Ontario? The Globe and Mail said that the killer of Dawson did it because of the language laws, even if the killer has written a letter explaining why and never been even close to refer to it. Your medias are capable of the worst when it comes to lie about us and misinformation. Go, I dare you to prove your assertions. 50 minutes ago, hernanday said: You made an allegation that French parents cannot send their kids to French schools. I have no knowledge of such thing being true, I am asking you a question as to where is this happening. PEI has a small number of French, if the French do not have the numbers to merit a school, that is to support it financially at least numerically, then they should not get a school. You have to have the numbers, otherwise 1 french parent in a 99% anglo speaking community can demand a multi-million dollar school. Isn't NB officially bilingual, it would seem they should have many french schools. Just because someone is taking you to court does not mean they have the numbers, show me evidence there was thousands and thousands of french kids trying to enroll to make french schools I am going to have to retract myself a little bit. Because by doing some research yesterday, I discovered that PEI now has 6 schools. That is VERY RECENT and I was not aware of it. Like I said, they won a judgement in 2000. Before that, they had no french schools, despite they were living there from the very beginning. Causing alot of assimilation and the lost of language. That is a cultural genocide. The reason was always the same. They pretended that there were not enough french, which of course that was no true. After they won at the supreme court, they finally got few trailer parks schools until they build the schools. Very crowded tiny places with disgusting conditions. The first schools were ready in 2009. Think about it, a community that finally got schools so late in their history. So it has been 7 years that they finally got their schools. I found a site saying that there are still some french communities without schools but, I will hold my breath until I find more reliable sources. I will just admit these are very good news and it is not as worst as it once was, not so long ago. Why bitterness? Because it is not normal that they had to fight so hard to get something that is suppose to ne so essential. 50 minutes ago, hernanday said: If Quebec leaves, the constitution will have to be amended. There will be no justification for allowing special goodies for French people when the largest bloc of them have left the country, it makes no sense. You cannot realistically believe the other provinces are even dealing with bilingualism other than for Quebec's existence (except maybe nb). French is not even in the top 5 foreign languages in BC, why would they make so much accommodations for such a tiny population? It is like you are literally insane and believe that just being French should grant you some special status even if the only reason for that status existing (Quebec) leaves the union. I would fully expect Quebec to pretty much become French only if they left the union, they are not offering English services out of kindness but rather as part of a deal with other provinces. Who cares, I'd prefer if all the French people go back to France or Quebec and separate if they are just going to whine about driving up cost for tax payers by not assimilating and getting special language schools that their numbers do not justify. If you are going to live in an English province then just learn English. I'd also recommend those in Quebec to learn french. My answer to that is the same as the previous one. You have no respect for french canadians. You only tolerate them because there is a big member that you fear. Once we are out, you think you can wipe their rights away. I will tell you what it means for us in Québec. The day you will feel that you no longer fear us, you will trash or rights as well. By the way, according to your impeccable logic, we should no longer give our english any special status because the immigrants are now more than them. It seems that the english here are not listening to you or do not understand the message. Repeat it out loud. I doubt very much that most of Canadians are like you. For the majority, it's not a problem to recognize that this country has been founded by two major ethnic groups, plus the natives and all should have recognitions where they are in minorities. If you really care about your tax money, then why do you choose corrupted governments like that all the time. Why do you allow duplication? Why being so easy for tax invasions? check up with your priorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted November 30, 2016 Report Share Posted November 30, 2016 5 hours ago, Benz said: But it would mean that the federal will operate the mandate given by the provinces. I'm saying maybe we should rethink the mandate. Especially health. Why have health be a provincial responsibility instead of a federal responsibility? People move around within the country. Which means the benefits of say Ontario helping the health of Children may end up in say Alberta when the child is older and is working in Alberta. The result is that there is an incentive for provinces to provide less health care then is optimal due to these non-internalized spillover effects. There are very large links between the health of the population, and the population's ability to earn income. Thus, economy and health care are very strong linked. By having the federal government mostly deal strongly with economic issues while having health care as purely a provincial responsibility, it makes it extremely difficult to coordinate health care policy and economic policy. European countries tend to have health care as a federal responsibility, and they tend to have a much better performance of their health care systems than the Canadian systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benz Posted December 1, 2016 Report Share Posted December 1, 2016 17 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said: I'm saying maybe we should rethink the mandate. Especially health. Why have health be a provincial responsibility instead of a federal responsibility? People move around within the country. Which means the benefits of say Ontario helping the health of Children may end up in say Alberta when the child is older and is working in Alberta. The result is that there is an incentive for provinces to provide less health care then is optimal due to these non-internalized spillover effects. There are very large links between the health of the population, and the population's ability to earn income. Thus, economy and health care are very strong linked. By having the federal government mostly deal strongly with economic issues while having health care as purely a provincial responsibility, it makes it extremely difficult to coordinate health care policy and economic policy. European countries tend to have health care as a federal responsibility, and they tend to have a much better performance of their health care systems than the Canadian systems. Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against setting Canada wide standards. The provinces can clearly agree on that and give the mandate to the federal for it. But that is not what you are saying. You are rather giving the power to the federal to decide if there would be standards and what those would be. It's not the same thing. On papers, what you say is making sense. That is why there was equalization in health care system before the liberals cut the whole program in 1994. The provinces finance were bleeding until 2000 when the federal started to fund it again but, not with an equalization method anymore. I am not against your proposition. The catch is, provinces do not have all the same standards. So if a province wants to cover more than its neighbor does, it needs to have its own program anyway. It makes the end of duplicate powers near impossible. Maybe the best approach would be that the provinces decide together what would be the federal standards and the federal applies it. The administration would be done by the federal state but, the choices would be done by the majority of the provinces. Any changes to those standards would need the approval of 75%. (totally arbitrary from me, just proposing) My primary concern is, I would not want that a right wing government in Ottawa lowers the federal standards, having consequences on provinces that would never take such decision. The agenda of the government in Ottawa should not interfere with the health service for all Canadians. However, the weak spot with my idea is, if we want to raise the standards, it might become alot more difficult as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted December 1, 2016 Report Share Posted December 1, 2016 21 hours ago, Benz said: Yes. But you said that Québec is unilingual, which is not the same thing. Saskatchewan has NO official language. Neither english, nor french are banned. Having French as the unique official language in Québec, does not mean that english has not some recognition. The Official language act of Canada still apply as well and we are ok with that. You get confused between official status and unicity. Despite english is not an official language for the Quebec state, it does have other official recognitions. For instance, education and administration. Even if Québec separates completely, those rights won't vanish because they are in Quebec's rules. So Quebec having just French as an official language is not unilingual in your mind? To me, that would be more or less unilingual, you are only recognizing one official language, to me that is unilingual. I don't think any province bans a language as far as I know. I have no clue what unicity is, and have never heard of such a word. If Quebec separates, I don't care what they do after that. 21 hours ago, Benz said: You are answering yourself. Maybe it's my understanding of english language that is poor, but first you say that you never said useless, then the next line you say it is useless. It is pretty much contradictory to me. Can you say it in french? I said the context was different. French is useful for children in Quebec and maybe NB. French is useless for 99% of anglophone children outside those regions because they will never acquire the proficiency to understand a french person. Those statements are not contradictions. French is useful in France or Congo. Teaching French in Australia is useless because they do not have interactions with real french people enough to understand the language in any large scale meaningful manner. --Le français est utile pour les enfants au Québec et peut-être au N.-B. français est inutile pour 99% des enfants anglophones en dehors de ces régions parce qu'ils n'obtiendront jamais la maîtrise de comprendre le français-- 21 hours ago, Benz said: We observe the same thing here or anywhere else in the world regarding the learning . Just teaching it in a class is not enough. Immersions are necessary to stand still the language skill. Exactly, and 99% of English speakers in Canada, or at least in the high 90s, will never have a chance for real immersive learning. Meaning that the education resources are being wasted on something we both know as people who are at least partially bilingual, is not effective and will not meet the desired goal. Having free transfers to quebec schools for 6 months would be more effective for tax payers than paying for 9 years of basic (ineffective) french programs for students from 1-9 in ontario. 21 hours ago, Benz said: Please show me your studies. They are in contradictions with everything else I have seen so far. I am not surprised it is in contradiction of what you have seen, because when I first came across these studies I had a similar reaction. Ask yourself, what have you seen, who was it coming from? For me, it was always people promoting bilingualism and who stood to make money off of it! Some french or spanish language school usually. " There is strong evidence that bilinguals have a deficit in speech perception for their second language compared with monolingual speakers under unfavourable listening conditions (e.g., noise or reverberation), despite performing similarly to monolingual speakers under quiet conditions. This deficit persists for speakers highly proficient in their second language and is greater in those who learned the language later in life. These findings have important educational implications because the number of multilingual children is increasing worldwide, and many of these children are being taught in their non-native language under poor classroom acoustic conditions. " https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21771217 Quote Another settled fact that bilingual education denies is the "time-on-task" principle, i.e., the more time spent studying a subject, the better that subject will be learned. Clearly, a child who is taught mathematics one hour a day will learn more math than the student who receives only 30 minutes of relevant instruction a day. Bilingual education advocates insist that children who are taught in some other language most of the school day for several years will become completely fluent and literate in English when they are olderan idea that not only defies reason but, in fact, is now proven false. https://www2.gwu.edu/~ccps/pop_billing.html Quote The accumulated research of the past thirty years reveals almost no justification for teaching children in their native languages to help them learn either English or other subjects -- and these are the chief objectives of all legislation and judicial decisions in this field. https://www.theatlantic.com/past/issues/98may/biling.htm " In Oakville, Ont., Amanda Lee’s son, Conan, was struggling in early French immersion. The school had little support for him in French, she says, and paying for a tutor at home didn’t help him keep up. By Grade 2, “one of his teachers recommended we pull him out,” Lee says. A year later, they did. “It got to the point where we thought that we were burdening him too much,” she adds. “If he was struggling in two languages then we felt we need to take some of that load off him.” " "Denise Davy, a mother from Burlington, says she pulled her daughter out of Pineland, where French immersion was prioritized, because the English program was so bad. “There were no supports, nothing available for my daughter who was struggling,” she says. “I’m not against bilingualism,” but she does take issue with “the ripple effect the [French immersion] demand is having on other programs. Parents who first enroll their kids in French immersion are quick to boast about their little ones speaking both of Canada’s official languages one day, but odds are they don’t think about their child being one of the many that drop out. “You start out with a school that has five classes in Grade 1, and by the time you hit Grade 8 there are two classes,” says Nancy Wise, the French immersion educational consultant." For the 2007-08 school year in B.C. public schools, 4,281 Grade 6 students were part of the French immersion program, thanks to an influx of late immersion students. By the time that age group reached Grade 12 last year, approximately 2,230 remained. Meanwhile in New Brunswick, Canada’s only officially bilingual province, of the 1,469 anglophone students that entered early French immersion back in 1995, less than half (only 612) stayed with the program into Grade 12, according to a 2008 report. From those Grade 12 students who then took an oral proficiency test, 99 per cent achieved at least an “intermediate” score, but only 42 per cent reached the mark of “advanced or higher.” So, what about dreams of fluently bilingual kids with the perfect accents? “I think we were naive,” says Genesee. “It can’t happen if you’re only using a language five hours a day, five days a week for 10 months of the year.” What happens after high school graduation? Turns out native English speakers living outside Canada’s sole francophone province are rather poor at keeping up their French skills as they get older. In 1996, 15 per cent of 15- to 19-year-old anglophones outside Quebec could conduct a conversation in both of Canada’s official languages. Fast forward 15 years and the bilingualism rate for 30- to 35-year-olds in 2011 was eight per cent. The bold is very common, and I have two sibling teachers and a wife teacher. Children perform poorly in bilingual education are pulled out and put back into English education and then try to play catch but are so far behind they get stuck in the IEP programs as they are several grade levels behind. This is not to say all the kids end up this way, but it is a sizable portion. Before French immersion you might have 3-4 kids getting an iep a year, with french immersion the number is like 10 of 30 kids or a third of the class. Bilingual education is a waste, you dump all these resources and only 42% of the kids can even say the most basic things in French and cannot understand spoken french for the most part but can catch a few words in a sentence here and there. They are still going to need the French person to actually understand what is being said. 21 hours ago, Benz said: I did not mention anything about it. I was talking about the french having problems to access french schools. But I already answered your question. There are alot of things that are taught to children and that won't be useful for them later, or at best just few of them. A second language is often one of them. If you think it is not a good thing for your kids to learn a language, even if the odds are very high that they will eventually lose it, that is another issue. Even if I do not desagree with your numbers, I believe you are wrong. But I see it as a different topic and the link with french is just a matter of context. Why would we add to the bad by teaching kids more useless stuff. Shouldn't we be teaching them technology to compete with California and New York and Germany and London and Japan? 21 hours ago, Benz said: See, that is what I am saying to Taxme as well. Look at yourself in the mirror. You allow Franco-Ontarians to have french schools and services, but you do not do it for them. You are doing it for Québec. It means you have no respect for them, you only do it because Québec has a bigger balance of power. Your reasonning says alot about you. No wonder they constantly have to fight over and over. You let it go only when Québec roars. So much for the recognition of the minorities. We are so diverse we cannot have public language schools for a 5% minority, it would lead to an insane outcome. We cannot give french people special goodies for being French. You are not that special, sorry. But for Quebec, we have no reason to support French languages anymore than Polish, Mandarin or African or ojibwe. 21 hours ago, Benz said: I dare you to prove it. I know alot of english medias are telling you that we are the worst nazis in the history. But when you look for yourself, you will see there is nothing true in that crapt. All the aboriginals of Canada are using the agreements we had with the Crees and the Innus as a reference of good relations. It is in Québec that the people have the highest respectful opinion of aboriginals according to Léger & Léger. If you really think that we treat badly the arabs and chineses and blacks, be my guess and prove it. Any worst than Ontario? The Globe and Mail said that the killer of Dawson did it because of the language laws, even if the killer has written a letter explaining why and never been even close to refer to it. Your medias are capable of the worst when it comes to lie about us and misinformation. Go, I dare you to prove your assertions. I am going to have to retract myself a little bit. Because by doing some research yesterday, I discovered that PEI now has 6 schools. That is VERY RECENT and I was not aware of it. Like I said, they won a judgement in 2000. Before that, they had no french schools, despite they were living there from the very beginning. Causing alot of assimilation and the lost of language. That is a cultural genocide. The reason was always the same. They pretended that there were not enough french, which of course that was no true. After they won at the supreme court, they finally got few trailer parks schools until they build the schools. Very crowded tiny places with disgusting conditions. The first schools were ready in 2009. Think about it, a community that finally got schools so late in their history. So it has been 7 years that they finally got their schools. I found a site saying that there are still some french communities without schools but, I will hold my breath until I find more reliable sources. I will just admit these are very good news and it is not as worst as it once was, not so long ago. Why bitterness? Because it is not normal that they had to fight so hard to get something that is suppose to ne so essential. Or they could just pay for their own private language schools like you know, every other ethnic group. And speaking of cultural genocide, wasn't it you french who enslaved AFricans in quebec and forbid them from speaking their own language? 21 hours ago, Benz said: My answer to that is the same as the previous one. You have no respect for french canadians. You only tolerate them because there is a big member that you fear. Once we are out, you think you can wipe their rights away. I will tell you what it means for us in Québec. The day you will feel that you no longer fear us, you will trash or rights as well. By the way, according to your impeccable logic, we should no longer give our english any special status because the immigrants are now more than them. It seems that the english here are not listening to you or do not understand the message. Repeat it out loud. I doubt very much that most of Canadians are like you. For the majority, it's not a problem to recognize that this country has been founded by two major ethnic groups, plus the natives and all should have recognitions where they are in minorities. If you really care about your tax money, then why do you choose corrupted governments like that all the time. Why do you allow duplication? Why being so easy for tax invasions? check up with your priorities. I think the English sould not have any special status in Quebec. Simply their numbers justify a school, in the interest of confederation they should get one and vice versa for french in roc. But that goes for any language, if 1000 italian familes want an italian school or african families want an african school or chinese a chinese school so be it. If the french numbers are so low you cannot fill a school, you dont deserve a school plain and simple. Why do you want an empty building assigned for french or any other language, that is a waste of money. What does it mean the country was founded by two major ethnic groups, there were already millions of people living here, the scottish didn't try to say we found nova scotia you all must speak scottish where no scotts exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
?Impact Posted December 1, 2016 Report Share Posted December 1, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, hernanday said: Bilingual education is a waste, you dump all these resources and only 42% of the kids can even say the most basic things in French and cannot understand spoken french for the most part but can catch a few words in a sentence here and there. Except even the studies you cite don`t say that. They clearly say that 42% reach advanced level, and a lot of the rest reach a lower level but far more than a few words in a sentence here or there. I have 3 kids that went through French Immersion, and they all have different levels of fluency. My eldest son dropped into a regular program in Grade 10, but is still highly fluent and can and does converse regularly with friends and strangers in French. My other two both completed the entire curriculum and have excellent skills. My daughter is practically indistinguishable from a native speaker. She did a job interview for a part time job when she was in university that required bilingual skills and was interviewed by a francophone in Quebec. The interview started in French, and progressed very well. Half way through the interview they switched to English and that also went very well. At the end of the interview she was complemented on her English skills. 1 hour ago, hernanday said: But that goes for any language, if 1000 italian familes want an italian school or african families want an african school or chinese a chinese school so be it. Sorry, I can`t agree with that. None of those languages have official status in our country. I have no problem with someone setting up a private school without government funding, or meeting the demand for special language classes, but not special schools. Grade school curriculum doesn`t include language education beyond English/French, but high school does allow electives. After school programs are a possibility at the elementary level, but if on school property then they should be non-profit (ie. run by the school for a cost, and teachers paid and materials purchased, but no outside for-profit). Edited December 1, 2016 by ?Impact Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benz Posted December 1, 2016 Report Share Posted December 1, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, hernanday said: So Quebec having just French as an official language is not unilingual in your mind? To me, that would be more or less unilingual, you are only recognizing one official language, to me that is unilingual. I don't think any province bans a language as far as I know. I have no clue what unicity is, and have never heard of such a word. If Quebec separates, I don't care what they do after that. Wrong translation from my end. I meant uniqueness. I assumed unicité is unicity. Of course official language does not mean unilingual. Plus, as I said and I repeat, despite english is not an official one, it has guaranties and is protected for the english minority. Specific protections for education and few others. If someday we figure that those protections are not enough, I am very willing to add it to the official status. But it is not a concern right now. Don't you see that there is something very inhuman in your saying? You care about english canadians in Québec only if Québec is a province of Canada. You and I have an opposite approach to politics. I go for the people first, political structures second. You do the other way around. 2 hours ago, hernanday said: I said the context was different. French is useful for children in Quebec and maybe NB. French is useless for 99% of anglophone children outside those regions because they will never acquire the proficiency to understand a french person. Those statements are not contradictions. French is useful in France or Congo. Teaching French in Australia is useless because they do not have interactions with real french people enough to understand the language in any large scale meaningful manner. --Le français est utile pour les enfants au Québec et peut-être au N.-B. français est inutile pour 99% des enfants anglophones en dehors de ces régions parce qu'ils n'obtiendront jamais la maîtrise de comprendre le français-- Exactly, and 99% of English speakers in Canada, or at least in the high 90s, will never have a chance for real immersive learning. Meaning that the education resources are being wasted on something we both know as people who are at least partially bilingual, is not effective and will not meet the desired goal. Having free transfers to quebec schools for 6 months would be more effective for tax payers than paying for 9 years of basic (ineffective) french programs for students from 1-9 in ontario. True for your last paragraph. However, you under estimate the use of french for the anglos. Lower down your 99%. Alot of anglos in NB wants their children to learn french because they considere it as an asset and useful. I have seen in the news that even in BC, there are parents who wants their children to do a french immersion. Maybe 75% will never use it, which is still a very high number, but even if they forget about it, it is not a total waste. Something will remain and the scientifics are saying it is good for the brain. I wish I would have done a 6 month immersion in another province. Something very different from my home. Like BC, Alberta or NFL. I know I would have like it. I think that if Canada wants pick his nose into education, that would be a very good idea to promote and fund inter provincial exchanges for immersions. I do not understand why the federalists are not even considering it. 2 hours ago, hernanday said: I am not surprised it is in contradiction of what you have seen, because when I first came across these studies I had a similar reaction. Ask yourself, what have you seen, who was it coming from? For me, it was always people promoting bilingualism and who stood to make money off of it! Some french or spanish language school usually. " There is strong evidence that bilinguals have a deficit in speech perception for their second language compared with monolingual speakers under unfavourable listening conditions (e.g., noise or reverberation), despite performing similarly to monolingual speakers under quiet conditions. This deficit persists for speakers highly proficient in their second language and is greater in those who learned the language later in life. These findings have important educational implications because the number of multilingual children is increasing worldwide, and many of these children are being taught in their non-native language under poor classroom acoustic conditions. " https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21771217 https://www2.gwu.edu/~ccps/pop_billing.html https://www.theatlantic.com/past/issues/98may/biling.htm " In Oakville, Ont., Amanda Lee’s son, Conan, was struggling in early French immersion. The school had little support for him in French, she says, and paying for a tutor at home didn’t help him keep up. By Grade 2, “one of his teachers recommended we pull him out,” Lee says. A year later, they did. “It got to the point where we thought that we were burdening him too much,” she adds. “If he was struggling in two languages then we felt we need to take some of that load off him.” " "Denise Davy, a mother from Burlington, says she pulled her daughter out of Pineland, where French immersion was prioritized, because the English program was so bad. “There were no supports, nothing available for my daughter who was struggling,” she says. “I’m not against bilingualism,” but she does take issue with “the ripple effect the [French immersion] demand is having on other programs. Parents who first enroll their kids in French immersion are quick to boast about their little ones speaking both of Canada’s official languages one day, but odds are they don’t think about their child being one of the many that drop out. “You start out with a school that has five classes in Grade 1, and by the time you hit Grade 8 there are two classes,” says Nancy Wise, the French immersion educational consultant." For the 2007-08 school year in B.C. public schools, 4,281 Grade 6 students were part of the French immersion program, thanks to an influx of late immersion students. By the time that age group reached Grade 12 last year, approximately 2,230 remained. Meanwhile in New Brunswick, Canada’s only officially bilingual province, of the 1,469 anglophone students that entered early French immersion back in 1995, less than half (only 612) stayed with the program into Grade 12, according to a 2008 report. From those Grade 12 students who then took an oral proficiency test, 99 per cent achieved at least an “intermediate” score, but only 42 per cent reached the mark of “advanced or higher.” So, what about dreams of fluently bilingual kids with the perfect accents? “I think we were naive,” says Genesee. “It can’t happen if you’re only using a language five hours a day, five days a week for 10 months of the year.” What happens after high school graduation? Turns out native English speakers living outside Canada’s sole francophone province are rather poor at keeping up their French skills as they get older. In 1996, 15 per cent of 15- to 19-year-old anglophones outside Quebec could conduct a conversation in both of Canada’s official languages. Fast forward 15 years and the bilingualism rate for 30- to 35-year-olds in 2011 was eight per cent. The bold is very common, and I have two sibling teachers and a wife teacher. Children perform poorly in bilingual education are pulled out and put back into English education and then try to play catch but are so far behind they get stuck in the IEP programs as they are several grade levels behind. This is not to say all the kids end up this way, but it is a sizable portion. Before French immersion you might have 3-4 kids getting an iep a year, with french immersion the number is like 10 of 30 kids or a third of the class. Bilingual education is a waste, you dump all these resources and only 42% of the kids can even say the most basic things in French and cannot understand spoken french for the most part but can catch a few words in a sentence here and there. They are still going to need the French person to actually understand what is being said. I agree to almost all the quotes you put there, but it is not necessarly in contradiction to what I have said so far. I think that either you put the necessary resources and conditions, or you don't at all. Otherwise it will rather be a failure and a waste of energy. It is also true that not every body have the skills to learn a second language. It is exagerated to say that all children can do immersion. However, all kids should at least start to learn the basis to figure if they can go further. So, IMHO, kids should have basic courses in grade 3,4 and 5, and the majority that have reasonable good grades, would do immersion in grade 6. Those who trail behind would rather focus on their weakness for grade 6. It has been few years that we now have in Québec mandatory english immersion for the french in grade 6 and vice versa for the english. I do not know if there are studies about the success and fail regarding that. It would be interesting. I think we would have some observations that go in the same conclusions you are quoting. I do not agree with you that the education should just stop time and energy on that. But it is true if that if a student is in difficulties and the success of his whole year could be compromised, sacrifying that course to focus on its weakness is the most reasonable approach. C'est ce que je pense personnellement. 2 hours ago, hernanday said: Why would we add to the bad by teaching kids more useless stuff. Shouldn't we be teaching them technology to compete with California and New York and Germany and London and Japan? If french is taking the place of technology, what the hell are the other things you are teaching to your kids? Québec and several other places in this world are capable to teach technology and a second language. I do not know what you do wrong. If you guys need an help, we will be glad to show you. 2 hours ago, hernanday said: We are so diverse we cannot have public language schools for a 5% minority, it would lead to an insane outcome. We cannot give french people special goodies for being French. You are not that special, sorry. But for Quebec, we have no reason to support French languages anymore than Polish, Mandarin or African or ojibwe. Are you born yesterday? French founded this country with the english. French is not a minority that immigrated from a foreign country. Plus, there are alot of places where the french are now only 5% because their language has been banned for over a century. Manitoba was occupied by french when Canada acquired it. French was the most spoken language of that land until a massive english immigration arrived. As soon as the english were in majority, they forbid french in public schools. Now the french are less than 5% of Manitoba and your attitude is, "well, since we successfully genocide your culture so far down to 5%, why not eliminate the remaining ones". We are in 2016, not 1896. The time of imperialism is over. Deal with it. You behave like you do not considere them canadians because they speak french. Ironic because the name canadians, you took that from the french. They are canadians, they are french, they founded your country. Get over it with your pityful old fashion imperialism. It's too ugly. Regarding Objibway and all other native languages, the same thing applies. What does it change in your life if the Ojibway learn their language AND english. The majority of the people of this planet considere the bilinguism as a sign of intelligence. Only unilingual anglos have disdain for it. 2 hours ago, hernanday said: Or they could just pay for their own private language schools like you know, every other ethnic group. And speaking of cultural genocide, wasn't it you french who enslaved AFricans in quebec and forbid them from speaking their own language? LOLLLLLLLLLLL WTF! no. Where did you get that? After 1759, The french canadians were considered the white negros of north america. They could not afford to own slaves. And before 1759, France was not as much in favor for slavery as Britain. Slavery was rather in the Mediterranean colonies and Louisiana. Very few Canadiens had slaves and most of the slaves were natives. Natives had slaves as well. Later, France banned slavery way before UK and USA. Napoleon brought it back but, it has been banned few years later. French canadians founded this country. They deserve to have public schools. They won't behave like foreigners in their own land. 2 hours ago, hernanday said: I think the English sould not have any special status in Quebec. Simply their numbers justify a school, in the interest of confederation they should get one and vice versa for french in roc. But that goes for any language, if 1000 italian familes want an italian school or african families want an african school or chinese a chinese school so be it. If the french numbers are so low you cannot fill a school, you dont deserve a school plain and simple. Why do you want an empty building assigned for french or any other language, that is a waste of money. What does it mean the country was founded by two major ethnic groups, there were already millions of people living here, the scottish didn't try to say we found nova scotia you all must speak scottish where no scotts exist. Justify the numbers... you know what? The problem is you are always in bad faith. You are not intelligent to figure out what is a justifiable number. You always say the number is too little, then we win at the supreme court, then the schools are built, then out of sudden there are enough people to go to those schools. That is why the "justify the number" argument is pure crapt. That is why minorities have rights. PEI had no french schools in 1999. The numbers do not justify them, so they say. Now they have 6 active schools. So much for your no-numbers. The two founding nations are french and english. Not italians, not chineses. You have a serious problem to differe a founder and an immigrant. Edited December 1, 2016 by Benz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted December 2, 2016 Report Share Posted December 2, 2016 9 hours ago, Benz said: The catch is, provinces do not have all the same standards. So if a province wants to cover more than its neighbor does, it needs to have its own program anyway. It makes the end of duplicate powers near impossible. By that logic, health care should be a municipal responsibility. Because what if Montreal wanted higher standards than Quebec city? Maybe the best approach would be that the provinces decide together what would be the federal standards and the federal applies it. Yes, it would all be wonderful if everyone agreed on everything and we all came to a consensus. But in reality, there is political disagreement. That is why we have a democracy, cause you aren't going to get 100% of everyone to agree on everything. Any changes to those standards would need the approval of 75%. (totally arbitrary from me, just proposing) So you want a system that has irrational preference for the status quo and makes it very difficult to change bad policy? 9 hours ago, Benz said: My primary concern is, I would not want that a right wing government in Ottawa lowers the federal standards, having consequences on provinces that would never take such decision. Like what? Move towards a European health care system, which tends to perform better than the Canadian health care systems? Oh the horror! Lower wait times! Look, the main issue isn't about a more privatized vs a more communal health care system. The issue is that you cannot coordinate health and economic policy effectively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted December 2, 2016 Report Share Posted December 2, 2016 4 hours ago, ?Impact said: Except even the studies you cite don`t say that. They clearly say that 42% reach advanced level, and a lot of the rest reach a lower level but far more than a few words in a sentence here or there. I have 3 kids that went through French Immersion, and they all have different levels of fluency. My eldest son dropped into a regular program in Grade 10, but is still highly fluent and can and does converse regularly with friends and strangers in French. My other two both completed the entire curriculum and have excellent skills. My daughter is practically indistinguishable from a native speaker. She did a job interview for a part time job when she was in university that required bilingual skills and was interviewed by a francophone in Quebec. The interview started in French, and progressed very well. Half way through the interview they switched to English and that also went very well. At the end of the interview she was complemented on her English skills. An advanced level is not fluency. Intermediate french is not a person who understands someone speaking French to them, and if you think that, you have never been in an intermediate french course. Ok, good for your kids, does not change the fact that it doesn't reflect 99% of students going through those programs. 4 hours ago, ?Impact said: Sorry, I can`t agree with that. None of those languages have official status in our country. I have no problem with someone setting up a private school without government funding, or meeting the demand for special language classes, but not special schools. Grade school curriculum doesn`t include language education beyond English/French, but high school does allow electives. After school programs are a possibility at the elementary level, but if on school property then they should be non-profit (ie. run by the school for a cost, and teachers paid and materials purchased, but no outside for-profit). Grade school curriculum allows any language that parents request as far as Toronto (and I think this is province wide) goes. Cannot speak for wherever you are living. I went to a catholic school in Toronto, where Italian was taught from kindergarden right through grade 8 as a mandatory class. If you had indian parents requests indian language in a school in toronto, they must go get the indian teacher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted December 2, 2016 Report Share Posted December 2, 2016 Quote Why can't french parents send their kids to french schools? I do not know. Ask your fellow canadians. They are the ones who block them all the time. Look, in PEI, they got their first french school in 2009. But the french are living in that province from the beginning. The Acadians were living in NS, NB and PEI way before the dominion of Canada entity was created. Even if the french wanted to send their children to french schools, the autorities never allowed them. They fought in the Supreme Court in 2000 and they won. Only in 2009 they finally got their real first school. How pathetic! Today, it is not as worst as it was 10 years ago. But there is still some progress to do. Recently, the french in BC had to fight to the court again so their schools can get the same quality level as the english ones. The french schools were too crowded, had less services and funds than the english ones. When there are no schools, you pretend that it is because there are not enough people. When the french finally force you with the court to have schools, they are too crowded because too popular and you keep giving them lack of funding that the englis ones get without a problem. The french always have to fight, fight, fight, fight and fight, over and over. The french do not get your respect unless they force you by the court to get it. Not sure where all this anger comes from, Benz you seem to think ALL English people are against you and the French culture....it is simply not true....maybe you , and Quebec should take a page from NB history....you know Canada's only Bilingual province.....where the French school districts have been up and running for decades....Here in NB the whole education school system is under attack, and it is the first place they look to make cuts....both French and English schools have suffered losses... But we , in NB are not whining and complaining that the world is out to destroy us....New Brunswick is leading by example , hoping that someone will follow instead Quebec declares itself unilingual and blaming their lost culture and language on the English pig dogs .....how is that working out for you....making any progress, gaining any sympathy in English Canada Sorry to break it to you but we live in a nation Called Canada....not Quebec or anything else, Canada....and we are all Canadians....regardless of what people want to call themselves in Quebec...... Now had the French been successful on the plains of Abraham, things might be different ...So now you have to play the cards you've been dealt..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted December 2, 2016 Report Share Posted December 2, 2016 4 hours ago, Benz said: Wrong translation from my end. I meant uniqueness. I assumed unicité is unicity. Of course official language does not mean unilingual. Plus, as I said and I repeat, despite english is not an official one, it has guaranties and is protected for the english minority. Specific protections for education and few others. If someday we figure that those protections are not enough, I am very willing to add it to the official status. But it is not a concern right now. Don't you see that there is something very inhuman in your saying? You care about english canadians in Québec only if Québec is a province of Canada. You and I have an opposite approach to politics. I go for the people first, political structures second. You do the other way around. No. Do you care about a the language of a province in tajikistan? No, because it is not in Canada. 4 hours ago, Benz said: True for your last paragraph. However, you under estimate the use of french for the anglos. Lower down your 99%. Alot of anglos in NB wants their children to learn french because they considere it as an asset and useful. I have seen in the news that even in BC, there are parents who wants their children to do a french immersion. Maybe 75% will never use it, which is still a very high number, but even if they forget about it, it is not a total waste. Something will remain and the scientifics are saying it is good for the brain. I wish I would have done a 6 month immersion in another province. Something very different from my home. Like BC, Alberta or NFL. I know I would have like it. I think that if Canada wants pick his nose into education, that would be a very good idea to promote and fund inter provincial exchanges for immersions. I do not understand why the federalists are not even considering it. I mean NB is bilingual, I am not underestimating the importance of French there, it is really bilingual 30% of the people there speak french. The problem is for ROC. There are parents all over the country who want french immersion, but it is a question of allocation of resources. Parents want alot of things that do not meet the confines of our strapped budgets, we cannot just give them everything they want, especially expensive language instruction when they have poor performance. Its not just they won't use it, less than 8% will retain anything. 6 months exchange would be far more useful, because you can actually understand and speak french. I know people who understand French in just 6 months exchange (can't read or write, but can speak and understand). Do you understands what happens to students who study french for 12 years but does not meet enough natural speakers? They can read the language, speak the language, know all the grammar but hardly understand a thing! They still cannot communicate with you. 4 hours ago, Benz said: I agree to almost all the quotes you put there, but it is not necessarly in contradiction to what I have said so far. I think that either you put the necessary resources and conditions, or you don't at all. Otherwise it will rather be a failure and a waste of energy. It is also true that not every body have the skills to learn a second language. It is exagerated to say that all children can do immersion. However, all kids should at least start to learn the basis to figure if they can go further. So, IMHO, kids should have basic courses in grade 3,4 and 5, and the majority that have reasonable good grades, would do immersion in grade 6. Those who trail behind would rather focus on their weakness for grade 6. It has been few years that we now have in Québec mandatory english immersion for the french in grade 6 and vice versa for the english. I do not know if there are studies about the success and fail regarding that. It would be interesting. I think we would have some observations that go in the same conclusions you are quoting. I do not agree with you that the education should just stop time and energy on that. But it is true if that if a student is in difficulties and the success of his whole year could be compromised, sacrifying that course to focus on its weakness is the most reasonable approach. C'est ce que je pense personnellement. If french is taking the place of technology, what the hell are the other things you are teaching to your kids? Québec and several other places in this world are capable to teach technology and a second language. I do not know what you do wrong. If you guys need an help, we will be glad to show you. Part of this is a money issue, many English provinces have strapped education budgets. We have lots of issues. We have kids in grade 10 who studied only English, born in Canada, and still are getting nothing but C's and D's. And we are suppose to add on a language to these students who cannot pass the only language they know? We should eliminate French really except for those who want to learn in French, most kids in Ontario could benefit more from learning other important skills that really matter to them like Math and writing, reading ENGLISH. Out of a class of 30 kids, only 2-3 mainly females even care about it, for most kids in Ontario French class is a time to goof off and not pay attention because who cares you'll never use it. Teachers in Ontario spend alot of time just dealing with discipline issues. Mainy of the kids are unruly, have no respect for the teachers, the parents do not teach them any respect or education and since they are just waiting to inherit grandpas farm they feel education doesn't matter, they just want to be on their phone in class all day. In many schools in Ontario you have a 30-40% drop out rate, maybe just a couple of kids will go to university. Many of them have real problems by high school in their home lives, French is literally the last thing on their mind. I could think that an extra hour of math, writing, tech help etc or even homework would be more useful For whatever reason, it is much harder for an English speaker to learn a second language than most other groups. I seen it throughout Europe as well. Multilingualism is very common throughout much of Europe but then you get to England, and for native born English, multilingualism is rare compared to the rest of Europe. It may simply just be harder to go from a unique language like English which has no real close relatives to french than vice versa. Also American media is globally dominant, so it gives a big advantage to anyone learning English than vice versa. Throw on the general lack of exposure in English environments of French speakers and then that might be why. I've never met a native born English speaker who managed to attain any real level of proficiency in french (without coming from a french background or family) who has done this just through school as the article describes. 4 hours ago, Benz said: Are you born yesterday? French founded this country with the english. French is not a minority that immigrated from a foreign country. Plus, there are alot of places where the french are now only 5% because their language has been banned for over a century. Manitoba was occupied by french when Canada acquired it. French was the most spoken language of that land until a massive english immigration arrived. As soon as the english were in majority, they forbid french in public schools. Now the french are less than 5% of Manitoba and your attitude is, "well, since we successfully genocide your culture so far down to 5%, why not eliminate the remaining ones". We are in 2016, not 1896. The time of imperialism is over. Deal with it. You behave like you do not considere them canadians because they speak french. Ironic because the name canadians, you took that from the french. They are canadians, they are french, they founded your country. Get over it with your pityful old fashion imperialism. It's too ugly. Regarding Objibway and all other native languages, the same thing applies. What does it change in your life if the Ojibway learn their language AND english. The majority of the people of this planet considere the bilinguism as a sign of intelligence. Only unilingual anglos have disdain for it. French did not find this country and neither did English, there were millions of people living here before either group arrived and the vikings came here before them from Europe as did plenty of other groups. French are immigrants from a foreign country (France) and they are a minority compared to the English speakers in the nation. Tell me where has french been banned, preferably with links, because it sounds absurd to me, I never read it anywhere, not even as a conspiracy theory. Manitoba was occupied by metis, yes many french speakers and people i'd imagine as well. Ok, so the English did to the French what the French did to the Indians and the Indians did that to the paleo-indians. The history of Canada is one of migration, French is gone in Manitoba and is never coming back, forget about it. I consider French people Canadians, equal among all others. You want a special spot for French, they are not special, they are just like the Italians, the portuguese, or the chinese, or indians, native indians or africans in my mind. Canadian comes from the indians kanata or meeting place, not the french. The Indians and paleo indians founded the country, they were here first. French were one of the later immigrant groups after the English, Indians, africans and Scottish. Ojibway is in the same group with French, makes no damn difference to 99% of Anglophone Canada, get that through your thick head. Who cares what the majority think in China and India (the majority). English is good enough, it is the world language and all civilized people must learn it. 4 hours ago, Benz said: LOLLLLLLLLLLL WTF! no. Where did you get that? After 1759, The french canadians were considered the white negros of north america. They could not afford to own slaves. And before 1759, France was not as much in favor for slavery as Britain. Slavery was rather in the Mediterranean colonies and Louisiana. Very few Canadiens had slaves and most of the slaves were natives. Natives had slaves as well. Later, France banned slavery way before UK and USA. Napoleon brought it back but, it has been banned few years later. French canadians founded this country. They deserve to have public schools. They won't behave like foreigners in their own land. White negros, that is some racist language you got there. And before 1759 you were slaving and right after it. French Canadians were major slavers! " Historian Marcel Trudel recorded approximately 4000 slaves by the end of New France in 1759, of which 2,472 were aboriginal people, and 1,132 blacks. After the Conquest of New France by the British, slave ownership remained dominated by the French. Marcel Trudel identified 1509 slave owners, which only 181 were English.[14] Trudel also noted 31 marriages took place between French colonists and Aboriginal slaves. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Canada And of course you want us to forget those slave you had in Haiti and Louisana aka new france. " In Quebec, slaves were mostly either Black or Indigenous people, with Black slaves being more 'rare' and 'valuable.' - See more at: http://www.mcgilldaily.com/race/SlaveryInCanada.html#sthash.rawoI5fr.dpuf In Montreal, one of the more famous slave owners was James McGill himself, the founder of our university. The University commonly refers to him simply as a successful fur trader, but in fact, James McGill, a member of Montreal's business elite, owned four or five personal slaves. In her soon-to-be released book, Slavery, Geography and Empire in Nineteenth-Century Marine Landscapes of Montreal and Jamaica, Charmaine Nelson, a professor of art history at McGill, examines how James McGill's business relied on slave labour. - See more at: http://www.mcgilldaily.com/race/SlaveryInCanada.html#sthash.rawoI5fr.dpuf " In fact, 85 per cent of Mr. Trudel’s confirmed owners were francophones, and the Quebec slave trade was well established before Wolfe met Montcalm. Nobody could refute Mr. Trudel’s careful research, so he was ostracized professionally, and in 1965 left his post at the University of Laval for a less frosty berth at the University of Ottawa. " http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/200-years-a-slave-the-dark-history-of-captivity-in-canada/article17178374/ The French LOVED slavery, in Quebec, Louisana, Haiti, etc. French canadians did not find Canada, paleo-indians were the first people here, they found Canada, Indians were the ones who named this place Kanata. All Canadians deserve public schools for their language and needs. All people are equal. Canada is a nation of immigrants, we are all foreigners and we are all canadians, there is no tier rankings of Canadians. A Chinese guy who just got his citizenship, is just as Canadian as you and has just as much language rights as you. we cannot put discrimination into law. 4 hours ago, Benz said: Justify the numbers... you know what? The problem is you are always in bad faith. You are not intelligent to figure out what is a justifiable number. You always say the number is too little, then we win at the supreme court, then the schools are built, then out of sudden there are enough people to go to those schools. That is why the "justify the number" argument is pure crapt. That is why minorities have rights. PEI had no french schools in 1999. The numbers do not justify them, so they say. Now they have 6 active schools. So much for your no-numbers. The two founding nations are french and english. Not italians, not chineses. You have a serious problem to differe a founder and an immigrant. 1 school, 1 single school, but 13 schools were over-represented. 13>1! The french did not request the school in 1999 and were spread out so they got none. Why should they get an empty building with no people in it! The French and English are not founding nations of anywhere except England and France. The Indians were here first, the paleo-indians the very first. They are the founder. Everyone else, French, English, German Scottish Viking whatever is an immigrant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted December 2, 2016 Report Share Posted December 2, 2016 On 11/29/2016 at 0:21 AM, jbg said: Isn't it great that a man such as Trudeau gets to feel all warm and fuzzy by being generous with other people's money? On 11/29/2016 at 4:18 AM, taxme said: Your tax dollars at work. Not mine. I pay my tax dollars to B. Hussein Obama. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.