Slashdot Mirror

What a hilarious double-standard you display. You think the Women's March was hateful because there were a tiny handful of racists almost-involved at some point who weren't publicly outed, even though there was no hateful messaging or action associated with the march itself, and you would do the same for Antifa, but when Pewdiepie gleefully dances with racism for years, literally spewing racial slurs and linking to sources of racist propaganda against repeated requests to stop, you cut him every break and mulligan in the book. When Jordan Peterson basically restates every alt-right position sugar-coated with a dash of pseudo-intellectualism and euphemism, again you don't see a problem. You are the embodiment of disingenuity.

Racist jokes actually ARE a secret nazi recruitment method, accept it, it's a tried and tested method they've used successfully. This can be mistaken as "being edgy" if you ignore the pattern to the "edginess."

And again, if a person is completely indistinguishable from a subtle and clever alt-right propagandist to an outside observer, we can treat them as one, no need to read minds for confirmation.

No, it isn't. Real conservatism doesn't just cut things they don't like with little to no rational backing.

We see this in the ending of UBI, the conservatives didn't provide any evidence it is bad, other than their declaration by fiat that it is bad.

Oh, so you're the arbiter of what's "real conservatism" now? Except the part where subject experts had and if you read the AG report you'd also know why. You did, didn't you?

Except it's not by the majority of people. Remember how you like to complain about Toronto area having a majority of the people and thus seats in an election? That's the same majority where the "Red Star" came from, and don't call their newspaper by your slur.

Except it is. Why don't you go for a walk in downtown Toronto, and ask people what their opinion and pet name for the paper is. Boy will you be surprised.

No, I don't mean the auditor general, and you shouldn't either. From TFS, and from me searching around, the one pushing an end to UBI is Lisa MacLeod, Social Services Minister (who's only been at the job for like a month or two), who's declaring it's bad, without referencing the auditor general or any research.

Then you're fundamentally ignorant of the subject matter and should really stop replying about it. The AG who made the report was a LIBERAL appointee.

Amazing. Everything you said there is wrong.

Your statement I was responding to was "Oh, so you're the one that's going to cough up the money?"

Going backwards, it isn't pointing any flaw in my argument, as my argument is not about me supporting or not supporting UBI, but whether Ford is a "Trump style conservative". Whether I'm willing or not willing to pay for a UBI is irrelevant to whether Ford's action (trying to cut it with no rational, only declaring by fiat that it's bad) fits "Trump style".

And since you go the argument wrong, your statement does attack me as a person. You're trying to bring me into an argument that doesn't involve my (or your) personal stake.

And none of this follows from the first. Your first was asking me to explain why "the Red Star" supported cutting councilors, while this comment about money is about the UBI.

Well you've sure offered a non-argument there. So again, are you the one coughing up the money or do you expect the people in Ontario who are already at the breaking point from taxation to pay for it? This is of course the same province that's shed 300k+ high paying manufacturing jobs in the last 7 years. No, my statement doesn't attack you as a person. My statement attacks your profound ignorance on the state of Ontario, it's financial status, it's taxation status, it's high GDP to debt ratio.

And of course it follows from the first. You do understand that the TorStar has for decades supported, and made statements that the cutting of councilors is important? Remember the part where you said "Where Trump tries to "drain the swamp" in DC, Ford tries to reduce number of Toronto councilors in the name of making things more efficient" but you're again fundamentally ignorant of why the largest left-leaning paper in Ontario has been advocating it.

I've explained plenty, more than I had to.

You've danced around, and offered nothing but opinions. On the other hand, I've listed and stated media, and in that media, not only reporters, but opinion writers who've given their views on this. You can find them on your own to read, it's not hard.

You objected to somebody else calling Ford "Trump style conservatives"

I pointed out how Ford displays characteristics fitting for "Trump style conservatisim"

You rambled a bunch of things that don't really refute what I said.

I responded pointing out to you that what you sa

The PC government also cancelled a large wind project, with hefty penalties expected, and cancelled the carbon trading system, which provided C$100 million for schools

Wow, 100 million for absolutely nothing,, not ripped from the pocketbooks of anyone, no sir, it was totally free!

Oh really? So where will schools get the 100 million from now?

Answer: no where. Ford did not even have the decency to come up with a costed budget at election time, and he is just axing stuff based on ideology, not on any logic.

Here is a university professor at UWO's Ivey saying it: Scrapping the carbon tax leaves a gaping hole in Ontario's budget.

But since when did facts matter? We are in a post-truth era.

No tax credits for retrofitting homes for more power efficiency (insulation, windows, furnaces, ...etc.)

I'm doing that with no credits because it saves me money. More power efficient windows and furnaces have an inherent value because they are cheaper - again why are you stealing from others to give money to people well off enough to afford homes?

Good you can afford it. Not everyone can, nor can everyone put money upfront to save on the long run. And trades folk will find that their business is less than before.

Electric cars are the quintessential example of high upfront cost (they are more expensive than internal combustion cars), but lower running costs (electricity to run them is cheaper, no oil change, no gearbox, no maintenance apart from tires and brakes).

Will you be buying an electric car soon by your logic?

Sorry to double reply, but I've noticed something important. You don't seem to understand what something not being proven beyond a reasonable doubt means.

No, I understand exactly what it means. You on the other hand don't seem to be able to read, or understand what I'm saying.

For example, in Gomeshi's case he withdrew his lawsuit and paid CBS's legal fees, but in the later criminal trial the prosecution was unable to reach the standard of evidence required for a criminal conviction. From that you concluded that he was the victim of a lying accuser, despite there being evidence to the contrary, which is completely unjustified.

Uh no. It went to court, and that was from the judges own decision in the case. Also try to at least get the broadcaster correct. You can either read the case yourself, try canlii.org or read an article like this. Yes the women lied, repeatedly.

The parent's example wasn't a very good one, but there are plenty of examples of people being prosecuted for sitting in a car while drunk in places other than California. (Here's one.)

To start with: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new...
"Thirty years of official health advice urging people to adopt low-fat diets and to lower their cholesterol is having "disastrous health consequences," a leading obesity charity warned yesterday. "Eating fat does not make you fat," argues a new report by the National Obesity Forum (NOF) and the Public Health Collaboration, as they demanded a major overhaul of official dietary guidelines. ... Promoting low-fat foods is perhaps the biggest mistake in modern medical history... The report says the low-fat and low-cholesterol message, which has been official policy in the UK since 1983, was based on "flawed science" and had resulted in an increased consumption of junk food and carbohydrates. The document also accuses major public health bodies of colluding with the food industry, said the misplaced focus meant Britain was failing to address an obesity crisis which is costing the NHS £6 billion a year."

See also, for more details: http://drhyman.com/blog/2016/0...

The history is even more complex. A more diverse "basic seven" was replaced by a "basic four" food groups including through industry industry lobbying, especially by the dairy industry, where "milk" and "meat" became half of the groups and the dairy industry supplying printed materials for schools:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Note that most people on the planet are lactose intolerant and pushing milk on many children even in the USA via school lunch programs and dairy industry advertising is causing them health issues. Dairy may have been a better food decades ago before so much recent alteration like the widespread use of growth hormones and antibiotics. Animal fats tend to have other risks associated with them, like too much protein and a concentration of carcinogens moving up the food chain. That said, dairy products can make sense in moderation for some people and dairy farming can be a good use of some grazing land.

They key point is that the idea of a diverse diet including a lot of fresh vegetables was being narrowed to what could be most profitably sold by big agribusiness, which for decades was mostly about dairy, meat, and processed grains.

Related: http://www.macleans.ca/society...

Also related: http://ezinearticles.com/?What...

And:
https://www.alternet.org/story...
"In December 1999, the PCRM filed suit against the USDA, claiming the department unfairly promotes the special interests of the meat and dairy industries through its official dietary guidelines and the Food Pyramid. Six of the eleven members assigned to the U.S. Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee were demonstrated to have financial ties to meat, dairy, and egg interests. Prior to the suit, which the PCRM won in December 2000, the USDA had refused to disclose such conflicts of interest to the general public."

From lobbying, food subsidies in the USA are completely inverted compared to the (not that great) food pyramid which explains why a salad costs more than a big mac:
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
"The Farm Bill, a massive piece of federal legislation making its way through Congress, governs what children are fed in schools and what food assistance programs can distribute to recipients. The bill provides billions of dollars in subsi

They've outed the leaker in chief. "This was unconfirmed officially until Trump himself seemingly let it slip while speaking in Israel on Monday, ironically while attempting to defend himself on the issue to the media."

Israel’s moves to restrict intelligence could be the shape of things to come in other corners of the globe. On the issue of intelligence-sharing, the Trump administration has proven erratic and unreliable—something that is increasingly alarming for U.S. allies.

strict immigration restrictions, few geopolitical concerns, and with little diversity.

You just can't stop lying, can you?

Statistics Canada projects that, by 2031, almost one-half of the population over the age of 15 will be foreign-born or have at least one foreign-born parent.[24] The number of visible minorities will double and make up the majority of the population of cities in Canada.

Canada admitted 35,700 Syrian refugees. That's almost 3x the US number.That's a heck of a lot better than the US's 12,486

Also, don't forget the province of Quebec - the second-largest province in the country - mostly french. Canada has 2 official languages.

Canada is more diverse than the US

A comparison of the Harvard and Goren maps show that the most diverse countries in the world are found in Africa. Both maps also suggest that the United States falls near the middle, while Canada and Mexico are more diverse than the US.

It's why I chose the US; it's pretty much the only major country that still operates that way.

Look at your last election. The rest of the world is laughing at you. Sad little man.

Nobody has more control than that over how their investment performs.

Hmmm. Where have I heard that refrain recently?

Nobody knew health care could be so complicated.

Actually, some of us (dare I speak here for more than myself?) do know the score on both fronts—such as the difference between productive capital and investment equity.

News flash, brother: any damn fool with quality prescription eyewear knows (A) that the American healthcare delivery system is so damn complex it could make your head explode in three easy lessons; and (B) that it's kind of extra end-of-tree-limb precarious to make a productive capital outlay where you have no direct or indirect price control of your end-product.

We have a very large market sectors where there are strong regulatory restrictions/impossible-to-ignore interactions on selling price (the two most obvious are medical services and agriculture). The end result is that the producers in most of these sectors are lobbied up to the hilt.

Just watch the fat fly when the lever is wrested:

Tim Hortons' extra-large trouble trouble — 2010

Everyone I know is in the same boat: used to regard Tim's as a decent lunch stop on a long drive (sandwiches were value, and you were going to pay for a coffee anyway) and now regard Tim's as just another disappointing rat hole of race-for-the-bottom strip-mall generica. ("Everyone I know" is not an unbiased sample, it universally includes people with quality prescription eyewear who sometimes cook at home.)

WTF? Where are you getting this bullshit, unless you consider Trump, LePen as well as the nationalist Parti Quebecois (who are a coalition of right and left) as extreme left wing.
Everything points to Alexandre Bissonnette being an extreme right winger, along with most of Canada's recent shooters such as Justin Bourque.
You can do what I did and Google "politics of Quebec shooter" and read the results. Here's a couple, though you'll probably call them fake news.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com...
http://www.macleans.ca/news/ca...

Ok. Good to know. Either way, you are paying that much because your province is choosing to do so with complete disregard for the market. It's a good way to encourage a new industry and FIT programs like these may be partly or largely responsible for the dramatic drop in cost over the last decade. Now that the technology is competitive without the FIT it no longer makes sense to keep the program.

The best way to end fossil fuel use is with a market driven program such as a revenue neutral carbon tax. This allows the market to decide the optimal solution and lets you drop taxes on activities that you ought to be encouraging such as earning and spending. It looks like instead the province has opted to keep the FIT, add cap and trade, and keep the revenue. Not the best. Hopefully Michael Chong will run for Premier and kick the libs to the curb.

Bullshit.

"Here is a list of gaffes, mistakes, or scandals that came out of the Trump campaign, just in the last seven days, just off the top of my head:

Let’s begin with the Commander and Chief Forum. Trump lavished praise on the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. He then made the unprecedented error of discussing his classified intelligence briefings and claiming his briefers were unhappy with the current President. After that, Trump lied, yet again, that back in 2003 he opposed the Iraq War.

It was then revealed by the Washington Post that Trump had taken credit for charitable giving by others. It reported he lied to the IRS, claiming donations he never made. What’s more, he illegally used $20,000 earmarked for his charity to buy a six-foot portrait of himself.

Trump then gave a TV interview to the Kremlin’s propaganda network RT, and afterwards claimed he only did it because he was “tricked” by Larry King. In another appearance he gave an incoherent monologue about something he called “nuclear warming,” which included false accusations against Clinton and sentences like, “Uranium is big, big stuff because it means the ultimate.”

Next, as the terror attacks of 9/11 were remembered, a radio clip emerged of Trump (on the very day of the attacks!) boasting that his building was now the highest in New York. Then it was reported Trump has publicly lied about helping to recover bodies at Ground Zero. He also claimed he personally had “hundreds” of friends who died in the attack, not one of whom his campaign was able to name.

While all of this was going on, he made an unprecedented personal attack on the chair of the Federal Reserve, Janet Yellen. He renewed his attacks on Elizabeth Warren, once again calling her “Pocahontas.” He promised he would start a war with Iran if its sailors made inappropriate gestures. After his VP released his own tax returns, Trump once again refused to do the same. His son tweeted a neo-Nazi meme. And one of his chief surrogates disavowed the Geneva Conventions."

And here we are still talking about Clinton's irrelevant bullshit email story without a single fucking mention of any of those. Add to that the fact that pro-Clinton comments are downmoderated, pro-Clinton or anti-Trump stories are never posted, etc all goes to show how fundamentally slanted covetage on slashdot and every other site has been. Then there is the bullshit AP coverage, the bullshit New York Times coverage. It all adds up to the media, mainstream AND non-mainstream, all working hard to push Trump.
 

You're right, it's a poverty issue but that hits minorities much harder. The problem continues to get worse because we cannot address the disparity in schooling for wealthy districts vs poor districts.

And I don't have an answer, so I'm not trying to play this off as if it's an easy fix. My personal experience with being a mentor shows me the lack of emphasis poor families typically put on education, the parents pass along their negative attitudes to their kids.

We've been "fighting poverty" for nearly 90 years at this point. But you're right it's a harder problem, but there's a lot of simple fixes that can be found. Those are mainly as partially pointed out, education for one. The other is family structure. You can even plot the downward trend when blacks(in the US) started abandoning family structures and single parent welfare households became the norm. If there isn't a strong family structure, everything else simply causes a self-fulfilling problem. No one pushing for better education, poorer education. Support for gangs/criminality, generational and cyclical self-reinforcing negative culture. Canada sees the same thing with native culture and again you can plot out nearly to the year it started to happen. The two groups are fundamentally different, but the solution that government has applied has been the same: Take kids away from their families(in the past), or apply forced abortions/eugenics, break up families, then throw money at the problem for decades and hope it goes away. This has been followed by openly supporting "alternative" schooling that has no structure on focused learning and now you've got the start of a collapse of an entire segment of the population. That know next to nothing, feel they have nothing they can do, and look for what everyone else is doing to survive.

The same solution has been used for education, simply throw more money at it. Now we're seeing the same alternative types of schooling happen in the general population of people, funding in many cases has never been higher. And grades, basic skills are falling through the floor so hard that it's scary. Here in Ontario for instance, over 50% of children failed the basic math and literacy testing for grade 6(even in higher ed like high school). In the 1980's when I was in school that number was around 20%, and being held back a year for failing a single subject was the norm. You can read a couple of articles here on it if you want.

I'm sure some retard is going to go hur-dur-dur racism or something. But if you're unwilling to look at the actual problems and start crying "racist" every time someone points out what the actual problems are, they're never going to be fixed. And they're only going to get worse.

I would argue there should be no visa waiver countries in the first place. We really ought to require everyone entering the USA notify the state department a head of time.

What about countries you share a land border with, like Canada? An estimated 75% of Canadians live within 100 miles of the US-Canada border, and "Canada accounts for about 20 per cent of America’s US$2.3-trillion export sector, making it the single biggest destination for Made in America products in the world." Requiring pre-visit visa applications would seriously dampen the enormous day-trip cross-border shopping industry. As of a few years ago, all visitors to the US require a valid passport (previously Canadians could enter with a birth certificate and two other forms of ID.) Since you already have full details on visitors from their passports, it becomes a cost-benefit analysis; what other details would a visa capture and would that information be worth the potential costs (ie: to the economy in lost sales)?

Nobody cares if Taliban wants to call school teachers terrorists, because we know, and they know that's bullshit. We just care what they DO, and what they do is try to scare people into conducting their lives the way their religious say they should. Beard police! No dancing! Fly kites and die!

Indeed, a better example of relevancy probably comes from western perspectives about brainwashing in public > schools.

Why look to an outside group that is widely dismissed already, when you have ones here at home pushing their own message? The question is, who is full of bullshit?

PS, don't worry about the Colonies not having representation in the British Parliament, inhabitants of England didn't, even the rotten boroughs weren't eliminated for another few decades and true suffrage was even longer in developing.

Of course, the US has its own problems with representation today.

No that's right, you guys are dealing with different problems which, in the end, will end up costing you just a much but instead in the form of taxes.

http://www.macleans.ca/news/ca...

...of Harper's government. He systematically crippled data-collection in Canada because facts and evidence don't play well with his ideological motives.

To see just how depressingly bad things got under Harper, have a read of this report done by MacClean's: http://www.macleans.ca/news/ca...

Here, go support Quebec and borrow the book locally:

http://iris.banq.qc.ca/alswww2...

He thinks Quebec isn't "corrupt", it *IS* corrupt. It's not even a question! I mean it's just written by a police officer with a foreword from the president of Interpol.

Can you name the equivalent of the Commission Charbonneau for Ontario? If the worst they can do in Toronto is Rob Ford, I'll choose that!

http://www.macleans.ca/news/ca...

You telling me you can look at your paycheck, your property taxes, all the other taxes in this province and look at the state of the province and you don't think it's more corrupt than anywhere else?

"(wanna talk about the hundred billion tax break of the oil company in the US?)."

Sure, but what does that have to do with the price of poutine in Longueuil? The US sure has a better economy than we do!

Male teacher bangs student? Male and female alike want his nuts cut off.
Female teacher does the same? Well, the boy was lucky... where were female teachers like that when I was a boy?!

You need to get with the times.

Male teachers who have sex with underage female students are viewed as statutory rapists or creeps; women who do the same are perceived as doing the boy a favour or providing a rite of passage, evidenced by the inevitable “Where was she when I was in high school?” cracks.

Sound familiar? The "no harm done" attitude people have towards male victims isn't right, and people's attitudes are changing, albeit slowly.

Yes, they should learn from our neighbours to the north. They seem to know what they are doing.

Not while the mega-conglomerates control the news AND the cables it runs on. And, of course, the Senators who would vote on it.

In Canada, corporations cannot run political ads during campaigns. Campaign financing is very much regulated. Unfortunately it is the Harper "Conservatives" that are doing everything possible to get more corporate money into politics following all the overspending trouble conservatives are in since their last elections,

http://www.vancouverobserver.c...

http://www2.canada.com/ottawac...

http://www.macleans.ca/politic...

as you can see, Canada election spending is very miniscule compared to American. I rarely see any election ads on television, and when I do, those tend to happen near elections.

Anyway, people may vote, like in the US. But there has been no misrepresentation of Net Neutrality in any media campaigns. CRTC is probably helpful here too. This has helped keep Canada's internet unbiased. Now, if I could just get an upgrade from this 3Mbps/300kbps ADSL line speed I've had for 10+ years ....

Well, she is our titular head of state ... but she has no actual power and gets no money from us,

This, and countless other sources say you are wrong.

Even the Canadian Government says you are wrong, but of course they attempt to justify it and package it so that it looks like it's not only "free" but money well spent. Think really really hard about that last statement.

I remember a debate with an Auzzie not too long ago regarding the same thing. "Oh, the Queen does not make money", but then again she does and the other monarchs do as well. "It generates tourism" is probably the most common reason for giving cash to these people, who really do believe you are beneath them.

And that is why students who can't find jobs are now suing their educators, and so is the government.

The U.S. and Russia, with the support of groups such as Humane Society International, the Natural Resources Defence Council and the International Fund for Animal Welfare, had argued that allowing Canada to continue trading in the bears was contributing to more hunting at a time when their sea ice habitat is shrinking because of climate change. The Russians added that the Canadian trade makes it easier for poachers in Russia by allowing them to disguise their kills as legal bears from Canada.

But Canada — along with Greenpeace, the World Wildlife Fund, influential scientific bodies and other NGOs — said the Canadian hunt is sustainable and that the real threat to the bears is from climate change, not trade.

Although the world sided with Canada this time, Derocher notes support is slipping.

From http://www.macleans.ca/news/inuit-scientists-say-defeat-on-polar-bear-trade-ban-not-final/

Sketchy social networking and twitter twits aren't proof of an invasion. Usually, an invasion is proof of an invasion. They're big, loud and well-populated. Rather hard to miss, really.

What we have here is evidence of nothing more than the West desperately trying to spin something out of nothing in an effort to protect the little Nazi stronghold they installed. What else can they do? Russia doesn't care. The West has no teeth in this matter.

Paul Craig Roberts sums it up neatly:
how-you-can-tell-whether-russia-invaded-ukraine

When are people going to click to the fact that the Western media lies about everything? We've seen this side show before, many times over the years. What makes anyone think that this time the same old liars are going to miraculously start singing the truth?

And please don't twitter on about half-empty trucks. Proof? Nothing more than a photo of a truck with some boxes in it and some men standing over them. Was it being loaded? Emptied? We don't know. All we have is a picture and a rumor. That's all the propaganda wing of the Pentagon has to offer.

Amazingly, Macleans has managed to stick to the facts they know without engaging in speculation.

Who knows how long they'll last before Psyops Americana kicks them in the rump for not playing along with the American Dream.

Gonna be a painful day when everybody is woken up with that splash of cold reality coming down the pike. The West has already lost this one. Russia has all the industry and food growing capacity it needs. U.S. sanctions are an idiotic, facile, desperate measure. Pathetic, really, because they mean nothing. They hurt us more than them, by a long shot.

Russia is the natural powerhouse on that side of the ocean; who cares what hissy fits the U.S. throws? The U.S. is irrelevant. They've utterly failed to even get their proxy war via our Kiev Nazis to terrorize people in a straight line without spilling buckets of stupid all over the place. I guess that's what you get when you employ raving psychopaths to do your bidding. Incompetent, butchering gits.

And while we're on the subject of incompetence.., where's the follow up on Malaysian Flight 17? The media dropped that ball faster than any other airline disaster in the history of airline disasters. -I guess the claptrap story started to fall apart under its own weight and threaten embarrassment. Latest material I saw indicated that the cockpit was shot full of bullet holes and that BUK missiles were not capable of bringing the plane down where it came down. No comments, mister media..? Guess not.

We can't even hold our own house of cards together, let alone anybody else's.

But still we see people thronging again to the soda jerk for more froth.

Actually it is quite possible that the surgery was done without an anaesthetic. This article is quite good: Pediatric pain

http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/1...

Old news.

One country in North America will lag the US in adoption, that would be Canada. Canada, the northern backwater for affordable digital connectivity rights, will lag for all the same reasons suggested for the US, except the US population will eventually galvanize and change things ... something that will not happen in passive ol' Canada.

Canada has concerns about protecting the sovereignty of its arctic territories. Snowmobiles could prove useful in that.

Battle for the Arctic heats up
Defending our sovereignty in the Arctic
Why everyone wants a piece of the Arctic

Lawyers study as long as Doctors, get as many loans, and make less. Most Law School grads make under $50k. Vets are worse. It's harder to get into vet school then MedSchool, the coursework is harder (you have to know medical care for multiple organisms), the loans just as bad, and $50k is a really good salary for a Vet. Hell do you think ANY humanities PhD is ever gonna pay off his student loans?

I would have a lot more sympathy for American Doctors if their foreign counterparts didn't make do with a much less pay. Luxembourg is an incredibly expensive country to live in, yet their Doctors make 30% less then our doctors. Yeah we overpay our MBAs, and MPHs, but it's very hard for me to sympathize with a guy who does the exact same job as a Doctor from Winnipeg for $40,000 more and complains he isn't paid enough.

I disagree as your facts appear to be incorrect.

1. Lawyers have 3 years of school and no residency. Doctors have 4 year schooling, 4 years of residency, and more residency if they specialize. Cardiologists often don't finish training until their mid-30s. I don't follow how you say they study "as long"? They aren't even close to similar.

2. You're not comparing properly. In Canada med schools are far less than the US ones. About 1/3 less according to the article. Thus, the society subsidizes some of the costs of their training. So they don't have large loans with interest to pay off which enables them to be paid less...
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2011/06/01/should-med-school-be-free-in-canada/

It starts, with a killer asteroid hurling towards the earth.

Our hero is summoned, and immediately springs into action.

He sets out with his trusty weapon to save the world from the danger of the week.

After a long and awesome journey, he finally reach his destination.

Finally there, he slowly takes aim, breathes, and fire at The Killer Meteor. The meteor, alerted to his presence, fights back. What follows is a long action sequence only slowing down now and then so our hero can do manly poses.

After a long battle, and lots of shooting and fishing was done, there was only a small fragment left, just enough to spend the CGI budget, and show everyone how dangerous The Killer Meteor could have been.

No one was killed, and the world was again saved thanks to our hero.

The End.

Steven Chu was a Nobel Prize Winner. Clearly Obama has gone power-mad and demanded that Chu build him an Army of Super Drones powered by the Arc Reactor in Iron Man. Chu refused, and when Obama threatened him Chu resigned in protest. Truth is Chu didn't do it on principal. He did it because the Arc Reactor is impossible and Iron Man is just a movie, but how could he explain that to a lawyer? Now as Steven Chu drives back takes the long and lonely drive back to St. Louis, if he looked in his rear vision mirror, he might see a star. A star closer than it should be, following him. The Drone Lord does not take "No" for an answer. TO BE CONTINUED...

PS. This is a joke.

So is this: "Obama Begins Inauguration Festivities With Ceremonial Drone Flyover" http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-begins-inauguration-festivities-with-ceremon,30974/
So are these: "Obama’s CIA pick calls drone attacks ‘ethical and just’" http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/02/01/czar-of-the-drones/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/07/john-brennan-cia-drones-obama

ABC News is reporting that a Guatemala City hospital found no reason to keep McAfee overnight.

Call it an anxiety attack, if you like.

You might want to compare and contrast these two photographs :

[This photo of McAfee and Vice editor-in-chief Rocco Castoro] included meta-data revealing their precise location, which a reader quickly pinpointed as ''next to the pool at Nana Juana Hotel Marina and Yacht Club'' in Guatemala. McAfee was soon arrested. Oops.

McAfee, Vice, and the limits of hipster journalism

John McAfee Returned to Guatemala Detention Center After Hospitalization [Guatemala's National Police/AP Photo]

The impression I have is of a man who was flying high uo in the clouds only to come crashing down hard --- and not for the first time.

That's right, Bryn Mawr has a good biology program.

But what is it, $55,000 a year? http://www.brynmawr.edu/sfs/cost/cost_index.html That's more than my relative is paying at her big expensive school. They'd have to be very generous to make it affordable.

She has a lot of good science courses in their standard concentration, including biology and chemistry. The tragedy is that I saw a list of unemployment rates of college graduates with different majors, and biology majors weren't doing too well. There was a time when a biology major would be welcome to teach in high school or even elementary school, and those who wanted to could go into health care, agriculture, etc. or even research. The economy is failing. We're in the middle of a biotechnology revolution, we're finding new drugs to treat major diseases, we need to understand science just to be functioning citizens, and biology majors can't get jobs.

Do you know that tuition in Quebec is $2,200? http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2012/09/20/its-official-quebec-tuition-hikes-are-history/ I wonder how much it is for foreign (American) students. As a bonus, you learn French. The French-speaking students killed a tuition hike because they demonstrated against it. The English-speaking students got a tuition hike. I heard a Canadian say that the English-speaking students pay high tuition, and say, "Compared to the US, this is pretty good." The French-speaking speaking students pay high tuition, and say, "Compared to France, this sucks." I wish our students were demonstrating in the streets, although I have to give them credit for Occupy Wall Street. Which the Canadians helped us organize.

But 100% of his >50%-confidence predictions came true. In the future, he should be more sure of his predictions.

I'm not sure that I agree with you a hundred percent on your policework there, Lou.

The national polls were showing strength for Romney, but when you drilled down, the models predicted victory for Obama. Whether the errors moved together (broad correlation) or not (independent precinct variation) determines whether you can apply "skill" with skill.

There were many pieces on Silver recently. The most cynical was this one:
Tarnished Silver: Assessing the new king of stats

Cosh is an erudite and formidable writer, which a background in French literature, and a redneck persona right out of the donut shop sketch on Canadian Air Farce. (I'd really like to see that sketch redone with Cosh vs Hitchens. Then the camera pulls back to show Pierre Trudeau and Margaret Atwood at the next table engaged in banal chitchat.)

In this case I'm not going to nod and slurp my double-double jumbo Timmies and cuckoo "you got that right" after every punchline.

Nate actually wrote up a postmortem piece on his bungled UK election call where he discusses the use of exit polls to apply a uniform swing (broad correlation) to the election as a whole, by which means the BBC outperformed his own predication. When you break it down, the R^2 values on vote shares weren't all that different. In that election, the best prediction came from a group which split the difference, applying swing to broad regions (such as Scotland, which behaved differently than the rest of the UK).

Silver goes on to argue that the UK should adopt more detailed exit polls as we have in America. I don't understand this, because I don't understand the incentive of people to A) participate, or B) tell the truth. If I have a vested interest in the outcome (let's just say I'm opposed to organized religions lacking the basic dignity to concoct their miracles *prior* to the invention of the printing press). Why shouldn't I just say or do whatever I believe serves my interest every step of the way? Every politician does this. It's his job to lie, and ours to tell the truth? Blow me.

The more exact psephology becomes, the easier it becomes for Joe Donut to play the game alongside the pols. This is not a feedback loop that converges to a good place.

In any case, Lou, I think you should sign up for a MOOC entitled Discussing "Skill" with Skill. This broadly means writing down the necessary preconditions (such as: x not equal to zero when dividing by x; x has a known sign when multiplying both sides of an inequality; infinite series converges; variables are i.i.d. in a variance summation).

Another potential source of nationwide "correlation" is electronic voting fraud. 90 to 95% predictions would be my personal ceiling in any American election until the last closed-source voting machine is on the downward escalator in some deep ocean trench.

Are you going to apply the i.i.d. assumption in a state government by Jeb Bush? If so, you're a brave man. May the votes be with you.

Luckily, I live in Canada where the right to offend people was recently restored by parliament: http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/06/19/five-years-two-tribunals-a-raft-of-secret-hearings-a-supreme-court-challenge-how-the-battle-for-free-speech-was-won/ Good thing my country has politicians who, unlike the parent poster, value freedom of expression over political correctness.

So you call me an idiot without a citation?

I am unaware of any private for profit healthcare in Canada. I was unaware that the Canada Health Act has been amended to allow for it. If there is any it is likely very small in in some fringe service that is a gray area in the act likely. Anyway if YOU read the actual articles, what little private health case that is out there is paid for by the public system in most cases. About the only thing not covered are prescription drugs, dentistry and optometry. None of which has anything to do with a liver transplant type of operation. (Though I think they should be covered, not sure why those are not really)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/healthcare/public_vs_private.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada#Private_sector
http://timelymedical.ca/
http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20060501_125881_125881

The third is to an actual private care referral service in Canada. If you look into their links you will see that they contract out to 22 hospitals in 8 US states...

So in closing, you sir are an idiot. Of course I should have checked your history first as I am arguing with a Troll.

The MAIN reason Canada is on there is because Wikileaks cables revealed The Harper gov asked to be put onto this list. http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/09/07/canada-to-u-s-please-blacklist-us/ That's right the same Harper Gov that is about to introduce an one sided Copyright Law favouring non Canadian corporate entities.

An update to the story:

Sonne has already announced plans to sue the Crown and Toronto Police

G8/G20 Summit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_G-20_Toronto_summit

McLean's article: http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2010/06/27/torontos-g20-summit-a-failure-all-around/

The Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/27/g20-rioters-toronto-protests (Note that the video attached to this article is now unavailable because the Guardian "no longer has rights to it". Isn't that another lame example of DRM?). Note the law concerning coming within 5m of the fence mentioned at the bottom of the article never existed, and was a fabrication of the Toronto Police Dept.

Police assaulting a reporter: http://www.thestar.com/news/torontog20summit/article/902236--toronto-journalist-witnessed-police-brutality-at-toronto-g20

Parliamentary Committee Slams Police Brutality during the Summit: http://drdawgsblawg.ca/2011/03/parliamentary-committee-slams-g20-police-brutality.shtml

Amnesty International: http://rabble.ca/news/2010/06/amnesty-international-wants-g8-g20-security-reviewed

Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETxuYOoNk7U
  Notice that most of the people are really there to watch the spectacle and take pictures on their cellphones. Only a handful stand up at the police line and passively protest. The police presence here (almost 1Bn spent on security for this event - although a lot of that was misappropriated pork-barreling by politicians as well) is a bit overboard.

Police as Agents Provocateur: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbLU9tdDwxo

Just some quick grabs from the Interwebs.

Tim Horton's "Always Fresh" is a lie, and has been documented to be a lie in court. The only problem is, it's legal to lie when "it's marketing." citation 1

The cost of purchasing a frozen doughnut from Maidstone, which flash-freezes them using the âoepar-bakeâ method, is approximately double what it would cost franchisees to bake them from scratch on-site, according to court documents. Jollymore says this process ate into profit margins so much that he and his wife (both franchise owners) were forced to âoeeliminate or reduce free product donations to charities, school fundraisers and community events.â

Tim Hortons co-founder Ron Joyce admitted the famous donuts ainâ(TM)t what they used to be. When the frozen method was introduced after he stepped down, he said, âoeIâ(TM)ve tried them, and theyâ(TM)re certainly not the same.â One franchise owner who backs the lawsuit even calculated that the âoealways freshâ donuts are 14.3 per cent smaller than the actual fresh ones.

citation 2

As for that other imageâ"frozen fritters in the back of a transport truckâ"it gets plenty of mention in the court file. One owner who supports the suit (and, like Jollymore, was a senior executive under Joyce) goes so far as to claim that some of the new donuts are âoe14.3 per centâ smaller than the originals. âoeI only have this information,â Cyril Garland wrote, âoebecause having noticed what seemed to me to be smaller donuts, I instructed my bakers to periodically weigh each donut in randomly selected boxes as they unpacked them.â

Wrong, and wrong:

1) Stephen Harper, the Prime Minister of Canada, formerly was leader of the "National Citizens Coalition", a right wing think tank that supports private healthcare. (source: Macleans

2) In April, a Conservative Member of Parliament will bring forward a motion that will define a fetus as a "person" and would effectively make abortion akin to homicide. (source: Ottawa Citizen

It's not just the OLF. Quebec has always been the most corrupt province in Canada (and usually the western world as well, which takes some doing). It's a blemish on both the RoC and Quebecers that it seems to perpetuate itself, no matter which set of crooks is in power.

The problem won't resolve itself internally, any more than Syria will.

As someone who's been here a LOT longer than you, your "extremely grateful to the Quebec voters during the last election" is offensive, ill-informed, and smacks of thanking someone for helping keep the place warm by setting fire to the furniture after they smashed all the windows.

You seem to have overlooked that if it weren't for the jerks in Quebec always threatening separation if they didn't get more and more preferential treatment, the Conservatives wouldn't be so right-leaning.

Don't like Harper and his policies? Blame Quebec - they created him.

You might want to do some research into western separation, which started as a reaction to Quebec "special treatment" sucking off the west economically. Remember, it's only Quebec that damaged its own economy and turned itself into a "have-not" province, due to 50 years of racist language policies.

The western separatist movement spawned the Reform Party, which basically ate the Conservative Party after the most suck-up-to-Quebec federal Conservative government of all history - Brian Mulroney.

It's no coincidence that another former federal Conservative Party member and Mulroney protege is now leading the most corrupt provincial government in at least a generation - Jean Charest - in Quebec (as head of the provincial liberal party, of all things).

Here's the reality - Quebec is and has always been corrupt and crooked - and the rest of Canada has paid a huge price for it.

in 1968, referring to widespread government corruption, historian Samuel Huntington singled out the province as âoeperhaps the most corrupt area [in] Australia, Great Britain, United States and Canada.â

It got worse.

If the choice is between Harper and any politician who sucks up to a Quebec that has corruption in its blood, I'll either spoil my ballot or sit at home.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/09/07/canada-to-u-s-please-blacklist-us/ and it wasn't really publicized in the media that the serfs read just some tech columns here and there. Oh, what came of it this near treason actions......nothing.

If you care to know more, you might start by reading this article. There's been a lot of talk recently about how Murdoch has been abusing his power since Margaret Thatcher's time in office.

According to this article at least part of the reason Scotland Yard has tried to sweep this under the rug is due to the bribes and blackmail from News Corp.

Tarkovsky should have used more explosions.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/07/07/he-hates-your-favourite-movie/

I know you were joking, but actually about 1/3 of all sick days are taken on Monday. Friday not so much, maybe because it's payday.

This book is by a friend of a friend; I think it tackles a lot of the issues brought up in this thread: Losing Our Cool