Slashdot Mirror


Canada Moves to Keep Skilled Workers

ashitaka writes "Just in time for all those who have vowed to leave the United States in response to government policies and mainstream cultural malaise, the Canadian government is announcing a C$700 million initiative to help skilled workers stay in Canada and become citizens. If you had the choice, would you really uproot to a new country especially one where the lifestyle isn't that much different than your own?"

811 of 1,067 comments (clear)

  1. Lifestyle by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you had the choice, would you really uproot to a new country especially one where the lifestyle isn't that much different than your own?

    It seems to me that a lifestyle that includes warm weather would be reason enough.

    1. Re:Lifestyle by observer7 · · Score: 1, Funny

      i am, updating my resume and packing my bags as i read this .

    2. Re:Lifestyle by ryanjensen · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Some parts of Ontario are on the same latitude as northern California ... in fact they have several wineries in that area.

    3. Re:Lifestyle by Gentlewhisper · · Score: 1

      The one good question that would be on every /.er's mind is.. are IT professionals considered as "skilled workers"?

    4. Re:Lifestyle by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny
      one where the lifestyle isn't that much different than your own?

      Except for that part where we peel our faces off and reveal ourselves to our god. Wait, forget I said that. Everything is fine.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    5. Re:Lifestyle by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Hehehe, had to check google maps ... you're right of course.

      Though Windsor DOES get snow just not as much as say Ottawa.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    6. Re:Lifestyle by mpsmps · · Score: 4, Funny

      So is Chicago. What's your point?

    7. Re:Lifestyle by Doppler00 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wow, that's not saying very much. If you look at a map, the northern most part of California is about 42.0 degrees north. The southern most part of Ontario is about 41.9 degrees north. It would be more fair to say some parts of Ontario are the same latitude as Oregon.

    8. Re:Lifestyle by billy+reuben · · Score: 2, Informative

      That statement is misleading. It would be more accurate to say that the southernmost parts of Ontario bear the same latitude as *Oregon*. I will grant you that the southernmost borders of Ontario share the same latitude as the extreme northern end of California, but so do Chicago and Cleveland -- which, incidentally, appear to be very close to the areas of Ontario you're talking about.

    9. Re:Lifestyle by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Ontario must, since they've got several apprenticeship programs in place for IT. While I was working to pay for college, I spent some time as an apprentice helptesk support analyst.

      It was good honest work, but after studying a trade whose roots are in the tangible physical world for two years, it doesn't have the same allure to me.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    10. Re:Lifestyle by Flowmaster · · Score: 1

      The vast majority of California winderies are in Central California, just north of San Francisco, where the temperature rarely approaches freezing. I somewhat doubt the weather along the California-Oregon border is hospitable to wine grapes.

    11. Re:Lifestyle by killjoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you want warmer weather both Australia and New Zealand have skilled immigrant classifications. I haven't looked into it but Belize is also a warm english speaking country where you might be able to relocate to. IN the pacific there is also saipan, guam (yuck) and fiji. There are also many countries where english is widely spoken even if it's not the primary language. The nice thing about canada is that it's easy to visit the US if you miss your friends and family.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    12. Re:Lifestyle by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      Funny by itself, but the movie reference is a nice touch :)

    13. Re:Lifestyle by quarkscat · · Score: 1

      In a word ... YES!

      But then I also have it on good authority (excluding the rabid neo(Con)artist Bushies) that most of Canada south of the Arctic Circle will be classified as Temperate Zone within 20 years.

    14. Re:Lifestyle by houseofmore · · Score: 1

      Depends where you are.

      If your in any of the border states, chances are, other places in Canada have a lesser winter. Victoria BC, were I am now has a very mild winter (no show).

    15. Re:Lifestyle by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      If you never get a frost, you must never get eiswein. Suffice to say, you're missing out.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    16. Re:Lifestyle by geobeck · · Score: 1

      LOL!

      Your siggy puts your comment in perspective.

      * geobeck is currently enjoying a typically mild Vancouver winter... in Canada.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    17. Re:Lifestyle by Ummu · · Score: 1

      Come to Vancouver. We have almost no snow in the city, but tons on the mountain. Also, lots of sun if you like skin cancer.

    18. Re:Lifestyle by rossdee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Latitude isn't the only thing determining climate. California and Oregon both have the Pacific ocean nearby to moderate the temperature during the winter.

    19. Re:Lifestyle by Belseth · · Score: 1
      So is Chicago. What's your point?

      Damn, I didn't know the weather was that bad in Ontario!

    20. Re:Lifestyle by vought · · Score: 1

      The vast majority of California winderies are in Central California, just north of San Francisco, where the temperature rarely approaches freezing.

      I think you meant Northern California, which is most certainly where anything north of San Francisco lies.

      Unfortunately, your statement is georgraphically half-right but factually all wrong. Many of best California wines were once made north of San Francisco in the Napa and Sonoma valleys. Coincidentally, it will probably reach freezing in both valleys tonight, though the impact will be minimal, since we're past crush.

      There are many wineries in Napa and Sonoma, but I think your statement could be more correct if it were rewritten thusly: "The vast majority of well-known wineries..."

      The VAST majority of California wine grapes are grown in crush districts 7 and 8 and in the San Joaquin Valley - all of which are in the central part of the state, a 220-mile long, 50 mile-wide expanse. These areas are also home to most of California's wineries.

      Read more here.

      See a map of crush districts here.

    21. Re:Lifestyle by garroo · · Score: 1

      The proximity to the Ocean is the big thing. I lived in the Queen Charlotte Islands of Canada for several years, and the weather there is BETTER than in Vancouver most of the winter... simply because it's so far out in the pac.

      --
      Oh my gawd, they killed kenny's mod points!!!!
    22. Re:Lifestyle by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1
      A couple points:
      • You owe Ontario an apology for comparing them to California in any way, shape or form. At least in Oregon, the observation would be fighting words.
      • Anyone with a map can show you that Ontario's southernmost point is roughly even with Klamath Falls, Oregon, over 30 minutes drive from America's only state cum idiot asylum.
      --
      Help us build a better map!
    23. Re:Lifestyle by ve3oat · · Score: 1

      Several wineries? Actually, dozens of them!

    24. Re:Lifestyle by prosonik · · Score: 1

      Well, since everybody jumped over this, so will i. My suggestion is to take another harder look at Canada before accepting that American media driven mind of yours. Based on media (Which, I'll assume where your deriving your sterotypical view of Canada from), I could make the assumption that everybody in America is gun-toting luntic that weighs 500pds, loves to super-size everything, drives a chevy SUV, while praying to jesus inbetween watching the lastest 50 Cent video. However, I know that's not the truth. I've taken the time time to explore that crazy country you call home. Anyhow, the canada vrs usa is really a flame war. I think it's a safe assumpton that most people come to love the place they call home. Personally, I love canada. I won't leave it. I love Hockey Night in Canada. I love Tim Hortons. I love Peggys cove in NS, Cottage Country in Ontario, Rockies in Alberta, and tall trees and great weather of southern bc. However, I accept that I'm also I have an american-counter part that loves his/her country, george bush and the nfl, and a place they call dunkin donuts. Finally, at the same time, We're aren't perfect in canada. We'll never, ever have the money that large american companies/universities can trees offer. That's a fact. We all know there is pros and cons to where we live in any country. However, it's also a given that most of us can be bought for a price, and no matter how great our country of orgin is, the place with the most money will usually win. PS, Start here: http://www.weather.ca/

    25. Re:Lifestyle by SleepyCat2 · · Score: 1

      There is a reason for this! Booze and smoke is heavily taxed by the Canadian government, because it is proven that these items have a general impact on the population health, and health care is governmental. So, the healthier the population the less health cares costs.

    26. Re:Lifestyle by macdaddy357 · · Score: 1

      Indeed! I hate the winter, and it's cold up there.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    27. Re:Lifestyle by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      I'm lost, but curious. What's the movie?

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    28. Re:Lifestyle by safetycritical · · Score: 1

      As a Brit - I'm impressed that Canada's got the Queen's head on their money. That's reason enough for me

    29. Re:Lifestyle by Flowmaster · · Score: 1
      Ok, right you are. Clearly, my knowledge of crush districts is lacking.

      As to the geography of Napa/Sonoma you are also right that, technically speaking, they lie in the northern half of California. However, no one who lives in the "real" (i.e., non-urban) parts of nor-Cal considers the Bay Area "Northern". Recall the silly attempt to split California into three autonomous regions some years ago.

    30. Re:Lifestyle by Flowmaster · · Score: 1
      Cold weather grapes are en entirely different question. I've tried eiswein. I like it. I'm also a fan of American Rieslings, the better examples of which are grown in upstate New York, an area which isn't exactly celebrated for its winter warmth.

      Do you see much Merlot or Cab coming out of Eastern Canada?

    31. Re:Lifestyle by Flowmaster · · Score: 1
      Spoken like someone who hasn't spent much time in the "asylum".

      California has...

      - The 5th or 6th largest economy in the world (depending on who's counting).
      - The best weather in North America.
      - An incredible range of ecosystems - desert, forest, alpine, the lowest and highest points in the contigious US, etc.
      - 800mi./1200K worth of coastline
      - A wide variety of urban environments and cultural attractions.

      As a result, California has a higher population than Oregon and ALL of Canada combined. People want to live here. Some of those people are freaks. Most aren't.

    32. Re:Lifestyle by phill7 · · Score: 1

      Lifestyle?

      Maybe in the 60's the social services argument was a good one to choose to stay in Canada. But more and more the canadian leaders have found a way to cheat their population like bobody else before. We pay more taxes than we ever did, and services are going thinner and thinner.

      As a fact, our leaders are progressivly promoting the american private system way as the goal to reach for our country's budget health, so they're lowering services and promoting privatisation of every public services. As a result, people are now paying private insurances to keep their services, and even then they wait longer than before for their health care, even when it's life critical. Schools are charging more and more to the parents for every little things our kids need, so much that the poorest people can't afford our "free" schools anymore, without at least some help from charity organisations.

      And the funiest part is that, like I said before, taxes are higher than ever. Where's all that money gone? Our workers and professionals are less paid than in the USA, our people have lower family incomes than in the USA. Where's that damn money gone? Well, one thing for sure is that it won't go in your pocket if you choose to come and work here, not as money nor as public services.

      I think the main priviledge of working here is that the criminality level is lower than in the USA. But I've been told often, and verified it, that in this manner were always a decade behind the USA. We now have some places that were very quiet 30 years ago that we now call our "Bronx". So even this is only a temporary plus.

      The only thing I know is that somebody somewhere is making a lot of dirty money on our back and laughing widelly at us.

    33. Re:Lifestyle by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      Sorry, you're wrong.

      Current estimate of the population of Canada: ~32.4 million
      Population of Oregon: ~3.4 million
      Total: ~35.8 million

      Population of California: ~33.9 million

      You could claim that California had a higher population than either Canada or Oregon, but by claiming both you're just being arrogant.

    34. Re:Lifestyle by Flowmaster · · Score: 1

      Me? Arrogant? Never. So I'm a couple million off. You get my point. Hey, look...I also misspelled "contiguous".

    35. Re:Lifestyle by kermyt · · Score: 1

      Eh... It's one of the planet of the apes movies,,, I think it's return to the planet of the apes. (I think). Anyhow it is the scene where the mutants are praying to the antiquated nuclear missile.

    36. Re:Lifestyle by Cruciform · · Score: 1

      Nightbreed. It was based on the novel Cabal by Clive Barker.

      Monsters lived in an underground city in Northern Alberta. One of the residents, Narcisse, wore two blades on his thumbs in anticipation of the day that he would meet his god, Baphomet.

      When the time came, he cut around his face and attempted to skin himself in order to show Baphomet his "true" face as a sign of his faith.

      David Cronenberg played the part of a murderous psychologist who manipulated his patient Boone into believing he was a killer.

    37. Re:Lifestyle by craXORjack · · Score: 1

      Beneath the Planet of the Apes. One of the worst movies I've ever seen even though I loved it as a kid.

      --
      Liberals call everyone Nazis yet they are the closest thing to it.
  2. The only catch by i8puppies · · Score: 2, Funny

    is that you have to dress like a mountie.

    1. Re:The only catch by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      You can dress up like Inspector Fenwick's daughter Nell if you like. About the only thing you can't do is marry the horse, yet.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    2. Re:The only catch by Flounder · · Score: 4, Funny
      About the only thing you can't do is marry the horse, yet.

      So, just live across the border in Washington State and commute every morning on your wife.

      --

      No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. - Cmdr. Susan Ivanova

    3. Re:The only catch by Liam+Slider · · Score: 1

      You forgot that you also have to go around saying "eh" and "aboot" alot.

  3. Yes. by hug_the_penguin · · Score: 1, Interesting
    Quite simply i'd jump at the chance to get away from this Godforsaken hellhole, and an incentive like this is going to do so much to encourage me.

    The question, however, is what is then going to happen to the immigration laws. Presumably they are going to have to do something to prevent just anyone jumping in and claiming. Will this preclude the majority of people? Will they lower the immigration requirements? Who can say?

    --
    ~HTP~ Hug that tux ;)
    1. Re:Yes. by mordors9 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the US is such a hell hole, why does it have to go to such lengths to keep people out?

    2. Re:Yes. by YukiKotetsu · · Score: 1

      If you think it's such a hellhole, good riddance. I hope you move to Canada. In fact, I'll give you $20 to help you move.

    3. Re:Yes. by v1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The upper class seem to do well with the people currently in control in the govt. The lower class does fairly well with the hand-outs. This leaves the middle class to support all three. Immigration is mainly by people in the lower class, where they stand to benefit by moving to the USA. Meanwhile, the middle class that are already IN the usa find their situation going downhill. So you see people that want in, and people that want out.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    4. Re:Yes. by Valar · · Score: 1

      The fundemental law of human sociodynamics? i.e. everybody has a different angle.

      That's right! Not everybody has the same priorities.

    5. Re:Yes. by felis_panthera · · Score: 1

      probably because NAFTA has made Mexico an even bigger hellhole

      --

      The chains are broken
      Loki is free
      Ragnarok is at hand...
    6. Re:Yes. by ooh456 · · Score: 1

      I left the USA for Sweden. I feel much better ;) America you are up yer own ronson!

    7. Re:Yes. by EvilMagnus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Have you looked at Canada's criteria for admitting skilled professionals? It's remarkably egalitarian and open - much better than the US. You basically fill out a checklist based on things like degrees held, languages spoken ... the higher you score, the easier/faster it is to get in. Canada has a form of 'open' visa, where if you qualify (say, if you have a degree and know a bit of French) you can enter Canada to look for work without actually having a job offer.

      Compare that to the US and the H1-B system, where if you're outside the US you must have an offer letter and apply for the visa from outside the country (3-6 month wait for the visa to be granted, if you're lucky) and your degree has to be directly related to the job you've got the offer for.

      So yeah, the basic criteria to be able to go to Canada and look for a job 'on spec' are; hold an Advanced Degree, speak either English or French fluently, and have a passing familiarity with the other.

      --
      -EvilMagnus
    8. Re:Yes. by paranode · · Score: 1

      Morover it's kind of amusing how they are using a socialist government program to try and keep people in their socialist system which is losing workers.

    9. Re:Yes. by Easy2RememberNick · · Score: 1

      Geography(distance from hostile countries). Weather(warm for the most part). If not for that it's no different than most western countries.

    10. Re:Yes. by etzel · · Score: 1

      Those lengths are for mexicans and arabs and what not.

      The US does nothing to keep Canadians out because they don't have to.

      --
      "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
    11. Re:Yes. by sedyn · · Score: 1

      Typically, because they come from true hell holes.

      --
      Am I open minded towards open source, or closed minded towards closed source?
    12. Re:Yes. by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      it always looks greener from the otherside of the hellhole :^P

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    13. Re:Yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Just because it sucks, hard, doesn't mean it sucks the most.

    14. Re:Yes. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      That's the same situation in the UK. We have an immigration rate of at least 500,000 people a year (for a population of 65 million). The good news is they all want to live in the South of England. The bad news is that the middle classes are moving out and pushing up the prices everywhere else, especially houses in farming villages as holiday homes. The only places where house prices aren't going up are those small towns which have lost major manufacturing employers and the population now depends on handouts. If this doesn't happen then the places become retirement colonies or executive home estates. And as the goverment wants 50% of the school-leaving population to go to university, so starter family flats get bought up by the buy-to-rent property market. As students are exempt from paying property tax, the tax burden shifts more onto retired home-owners, who can't afford to move anywhere else.

      So, there are people who want to move into the country, and people who want to move out.

    15. Re:Yes. by Jezebeau · · Score: 1

      Because it's easier to avoid getting shot while in America than it is to avoid getting killed by Americans when they decide there might be one terrorist in a mile radius from you.

    16. Re:Yes. by cass1010 · · Score: 1

      The H1-B system should not even be discussed in this case since most Canadians moving to work in the US would use the TN-1 which is ridiculously easy to get and keep getting. I was fresh out of school with no tech experience and had been offered a job in the US. I had a letter from my employer and my degree when I got to US immigration and was rubber stamped into the US. After that I just had to cross the border once per year at either Mexico or Canada with the same letter and degree and I could get extended. There is no draconian system making it difficult to work in the US.

    17. Re:Yes. by Sj0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sadly, you're still and ignorant sod.

      The problem is that the baby boom is over, and it's going to be quite a while until the echo boomers are ready to take over those positions. In the meantime, everyone wants to be a doctor or a lawyer or some other job they see glamourized on TV, so nobody wants to be a tradesman anymore -- the median age of tradespeople is aggregating towards 55 now, which means that there is a vacuum. Lots of jobless people with IT skills, but nobody who can turn a wrench.

      This is great news for people with a bit of vision, because they can get into trades and make a bundle right now.

      That said, this problem has everything to do with shifting demographics and nothing to do with socialism. The US has the exact same problem. Nobody wants to do any real work any more.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    18. Re:Yes. by Liam+Slider · · Score: 1

      We do? Since when? This is America, we breed with everyone! Seriously, look how xenophobic a lot of the countries of the world are. The USA isn't. We fuck everybody. Take my family history for example. My anscestry is mostly German with a large chunk of English, a fair amount of Jewish, a bit of Black here and there, a few Native Americans scattered around here and there. I'm considered "white" because it's a nice label to lump anyone who's remotely light skinned and had anscestors who came from Europe at some time. Mostly, my biological heritage is German. My name isn't, it's Scottish-Irish through adoption. The rest of my family, currently has Latinos, Greeks, Irish, Scottish, and I wouldn't doubt a Pole or two...being Illinois. Split down "white" into ethnic groupings and you find that percentage wise....there isn't much difference in absolute numbers between any ethnic group in America...the idea of "ethnic minorities" is either a myth, or we all are "ethnic minorities" which sounds kind of stupid. And all of us...well, originally our anscestors came from somewhere else. Even the Native Americans.

      America is the fucking melting pot...literally, on the fucking part. Our culture is built on the blend of other cultures. Why the hell would we go to great lengths to keep people out? We aren't over crowded, only a handful of idiots are racist, and we're eager for some fresh booty! You aren't making any sense....keep people out.... Nonsense!

    19. Re:Yes. by Easy2RememberNick · · Score: 1

      Actually I meant it's why the US has done so well, not Canada. If we were warmer I bet we'd be close behind!

    20. Re:Yes. by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      That's just the algea eating all the shit...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    21. Re:Yes. by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Hugo Chavez, is that you?

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    22. Re:Yes. by Maxwell · · Score: 1

      It's telling you immediately associated 'hell-hole' with America, when the poster did not even imply that.
      is that just the usual American arrogance (everything is about the U.S.), or is it fear (the poster may be right)?

      JON

    23. Re:Yes. by Kahlus · · Score: 1

      You may be able to enter the country and look for work, but you still have to leave the country if you don't find it before you reach the 3 month mark. You could stay for up to 6, but it requires a little more legwork up front. The only "qualification" is being an American citizen. Having a degree and such is only useful if you are trying to immigrate under the "skilled worker" category. It has nothing to do with obtaining a work permit.

      So I'm not sure how that really differs from a Canadian entering the US looking for work. Either way, you'll have to get a company to sponsor your work permit and work on the requirements for residency/green card.

      Although if you have more information supporting your claim, I'd be interested in seeing it. I've read the Canadian immigration website and don't see anything on there that makes me think just moving up there unemployed is somehow "open".

    24. Re:Yes. by YukiKotetsu · · Score: 1

      Quite simply i'd jump at the chance to get away from this Godforsaken hellhole, and an incentive like this is going to do so much to encourage me.

      The question, however, is what is then going to happen to the immigration laws. Presumably they are going to have to do something to prevent just anyone jumping in and claiming. Will this preclude the majority of people? Will they lower the immigration requirements? Who can say? --

      Show me where in there it says he is not from the US? Does this mean that your public schools typically promote people who can't follow the correct thread, and I should trash you too? Of course!

    25. Re:Yes. by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1

      I live in the US currently, but at one time I lived in Canada. Let me just sum it up nice and easy.

      If you are in the lower class -> go US
      If you are in the middle class -> go Canada
      If you are in the upper class -> go US

    26. Re:Yes. by EvilMagnus · · Score: 1

      So I'm not sure how that really differs from a Canadian entering the US looking for work

      Immensely.

      There's no US visa category that lets you enter the country without a job offer to seek work, whether you get 3 months to do it in or 1 day. Canada has a special deal with the US that doesn't apply to anyone else, no matter what your qualifications.

      The Canadians, on the other hand, will let you enter 'on spec' (sure, with limits - that's only fair) no matter where you are from, so long as you meet certain basic criteria.

      --
      -EvilMagnus
    27. Re:Yes. by hodma727 · · Score: 1

      Because they are carrying bombs.

    28. Re:Yes. by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 1

      Japan for me, and yeah, the relief is palpable. I get better stuff, better standard of living, better health care, and my girlfriend is gorgeous. Can't complain, can't complain.

      --
      "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
    29. Re:Yes. by drsquare · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's not very egalitarian, it's still biased towards rich educated people who speak French. The EU has a superior system where anyone can move from any member state to another and live and work there, with no visa and no work permit required.

      As an unskilled worker, neither America's nor Canada's system are any use to me, I can't go there.

    30. Re:Yes. by EvilMagnus · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting that in the EU, you can work anywhere because you're an EU citizen. Just like how a US citizen can work anywhere in the US without restriction. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison. I'd say labor mobility was worse in the EU than the US as you don't necessarily speak the same language. I couldn't go get a job in Italy very easily, for example, as I can only swear in Italian (I'm an EU citizen, too).

      it's still biased towards rich educated people who speak French

      No, just educated people who can order a croissant. You don't have to be rich to have a degree, just reasonably smart.

      --
      -EvilMagnus
    31. Re:Yes. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The upper cast of yuppies and lawyers have freedom of movement, whereas the lower cast of labourers who actually do the work are fenced into their countries like animals.

      It's a fucking disgrace.

    32. Re:Yes. by EvilMagnus · · Score: 1

      Well, it's simple economics.

      Most countries have a surplus of unskilled labor. Why should they import more? Many countries (including the US) have shortages of some specialties. Medicine comes to mind, but high-end IT is also a problem. The point being the more educated you are, the chances are the less people there are of similiar education. If you happen to be educated in a desireable field, you're welcome pretty much anywhere you want to go.

      What gets my goat is the US' attitude towards Mexicans. Legally, they're persona non grata. But the agricultural system depends on illegal workers. Sure, the Mexicans have more freedom than they should have (legally, they shouldn't be here at all) and they're arguably better off working in the US than back in Mexico, but it's a terrible double-standard, and they're still exploited.

      --
      -EvilMagnus
    33. Re:Yes. by drsquare · · Score: 1

      If they don't need to import unskilled labour, why do Americans import Mexicans to do agricultural work?

    34. Re:Yes. by nzhavok · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting that in the EU, you can work anywhere because you're an EU citizen. Just like how a US citizen can work anywhere in the US without restriction. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison. I'd say labor mobility was worse in the EU than the US as you don't necessarily speak the same language.

      agreed

      I couldn't go get a job in Italy very easily, for example, as I can only swear in Italian (I'm an EU citizen, too).

      Oh, I don't know about this. I'm from New Zealand but I have a British passport. I've worked in Germany, Belgium and The Netherlands so far without having an excellent command of the language. When I was working in Germany I had collegues from Australia, Spain and The Netherlands working with me. When I was in The Netherlands I worked with people from Scotland, Ireland, and France. And when I was in Belgium I worked with people from: New Zealand, Australia, The Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Greece, Romania, France and probably a lot more.

      Basically what I wanted to say is that amoung professionals there is a lot of mobility in Europe despite the language problems.

      --

      He who defends everything, defends nothing. -- Fredrick The Great
    35. Re:Yes. by EvilMagnus · · Score: 1

      Because they can break labor laws with the Mexicans and pay them less - wages that domestic unskilled labor will not accept.

      That's why I don't like it. If US Agri had to pay legal wages, there'd be less need for illegal unskilled workers. Of course, we'd all pay more for food then.

      Of course, there's still structural problems with the US unskilled labor market, ranging from a minimum wage that's arguably set too low to unreasonable expectations of entitlement amongst some workers (fueled, in part, by the massive consumerist nature of US society which tells them what they *should* have, not what they can actually afford).

      --
      -EvilMagnus
  4. The lifestyle IS different! by MLopat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having done alot of travel to the US, both for business and pleasure, let me assure you Canada's lifestyle is far different. We live in a much more secure, comfortable and friendly environment than most places in the United States. We have very little crime (Toronto, our largest city, has about 70 murders a year), we have the best health care system in the world, we have tonnes of green land, and are well respected by most of the World.

    1. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 5, Funny

      we have tonnes of green land

      Every time I've been to Canada the land has been white.

    2. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by hal2814 · · Score: 1

      I'll take 6 months of good lake weather every year over respect from the rest of the world any day.

    3. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by DanteLysin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The US is a large country. The "lifestyle of the US" does differ from region to region. To travel to "most places in the US" and get a good appreciation of each would take years. I'm sure Canada is similar.

      I moved from 1 state to another and life is very different for me. Turns out I like where I live now, I don't ever want to move back. And if I travel to different parts of my state, life is quite different.

    4. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by CyberLife · · Score: 1

      Coming from the opposite perspective (US to Canada), I'd have to agree. I grew up around Canadians, and I've always found them to be much more relaxed, easy-going, and friendly. These days I travel to B.C. a lot on business. I go back and forth across the border frequently, and there's a noticeable difference in the way people drive, in their approaches to customer service, and just in general demeanor. In short, they seem to be less worried about life and just live it more.

    5. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by davecb · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Our values are quite different: Canada and the U.S. used to have similar ones, back in the years just after the Second Wold War. We worked together, helped each other out, and had just finished smashing the Third Reich and everything it stood for.

      These days, Canadians aren't too interested in wars, but they still tend to cooperate and help each other out. The army mostly does peacekeeping these days.

      Americans, alas, have distinctly moved towards regarding the world as a dog-eat-dog one, with wars and militias as standard features.

      I, for one, think this is a bad thing, and harmful to my American cousins.

      --dave

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    6. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by AutopsyReport · · Score: 1

      Bacon.

      --

      For he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother.

    7. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by scowling · · Score: 1

      Canada's life expectancy is higher than that of the US, even within the same demographics, and we spend about half as much on health care per capita as the US does. It is clear that our health care system is more efficient and more effective.

      Canada's lifestyle is indeed different. Personally, I prefer to live free and not be stifled by fascism.

      And we're far more free than Americans, by a damn sight.

      --
      www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
    8. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by yesheh · · Score: 1

      As a fellow canadian, (who has also done significant travel in the states) let me dispell a bit of rosieness.. I agree, Canada's lifestyle is different but maybe not so much in the west. We live in a naive comfortable, freindly enviroment, with more gun crime than the US per capita (actually has risen since the advent of gun control legislation by 25%), our health care system is awful (but still better than that of the states), we have tonnes of green land ( where we aren't using it for sububia such as Richmond (both Toronto and Vancover)) and our citizens are well respected by the rest of the world. Unfortunatly this isn't so with our government....

    9. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      You say you help your brothers, but why is it that your "wonderful" health care system has month or years long waiting lists for basic procedures, and that you can't even get supplemental insurance for many basic procedures even if you wanted it?

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    10. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by BigFoot48 · · Score: 1

      What's your total tax burden and how much do you pay for gasoline?

    11. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by martin-boundary · · Score: 1
      (Toronto, our largest city, has about 70 murders a year)
      Of course that's true, but what you neglect to tell is that nearly all of these murders are vampire attacks. That's a fairly big lifestyle change for most people.
    12. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Seumas · · Score: 1

      You're kidding about the respect thing and the health care thing, right? I have plenty of canadian friends and ex-girlfriends and such and I've never heard any of them talk positively about the health care system. And you don't so much have the world's respect as you just aren't enough of an influence or threat to most of the world for anyone to care.

      I'm not a nationalist twit and I take people one at a time. I couldn't care less about Canada or America or whatever else. They're all boundaries that separate people who are on an individual basis, not all that different or unlikable. I'm just saying - you know - let's not go overboard here on our delusions.

      Besides, a few things don't make sense:

      + They want to keep jobs inside their borders - but they're going to hire people outside the country? So, basically, H1Bs. Talk to Americans (or even those working on becoming one) about that monstrosity.

      + If they're going to hire from outside of the country and bring people in, why would they hire a materialistic American who expects to make wages that allow them to buy a gallon of milk when they could hire someone from far overseas and treat them accordingly, as we do in America?

      Also - murder rate is a pretty crappy way to guage quality of life. How about other violent crime? Taxes? Wages? Can I get to see whatever doctor I need or want with no more than a 15 minute wait?

      The only real difference between the two countries is the perception in each person's own mind. Canadians and Americans are about as different as people in Portland Oregon and people in Los Angeles.

    13. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Sigmund+Dali · · Score: 1

      No, you were just looking at a crowd of people. They are a vale pale lot up there.

    14. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Sigmund+Dali · · Score: 1

      Very Pale lot. Spoonerism.

    15. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by evilad · · Score: 1

      For me, a professional and small-business owner, the tax burden is slightly less than it would be if I were incorporated in Pennsylvania.

      And I don't pay *nearly* enough for gasoline to account for all the externalized costs of burning it.

    16. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Seumas · · Score: 5, Funny

      I hate to tell you this, but you read the map wrong and didn't go far enough north. You only made it to Utah. :)

    17. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by ksheff · · Score: 1

      So have you authorized the gas stations in your area to charge you twice as much as everyone else?

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    18. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Just+Another+Poster · · Score: 1
      I'm sure your American friends who can't afford ANY health care when they're dying agree with your viewpoint.

      Tell that to the illegal immigrants from Mexico and Latin America who flood American ERs for routine treatments.

      That is, if you can speak Spanish, or the various tribal languages to those who can't.

    19. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Just+Another+Poster · · Score: 1
      and we spend about half as much on health care per capita as the US does.

      Yeah, well I'll bet people in Angola spend even less on health care than Canada does.

    20. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by blankoboy · · Score: 1

      we have the best health care system in the world, we have tonnes of green land, and are well respected by most of the World.

      Heaven help you if you need to have an MRI scan because if you might have cancer. Then you have to run to the US to get help as Canada lacks the necessary hardware or skilled doctors. =(

    21. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by BigFoot48 · · Score: 1

      Canada's lifestyle is indeed different. Personally, I prefer to live free and not be stifled by fascism. Confess, the UFOs are running Canada.

    22. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      What's a McMansion, and what's a "traditional neighborhood" in Canada? Most people I know, rich, poor, or crazy, want to live in as large and comfortable place as possible.

      If choosing a common design (what I assume you mean by mcmansion) cuts down on the cost, then that money can be applied elsewhere, such as a larger lot, bigger house, better car, more vacations, savings, etc. What's wrong with that? Do you think everyone should have the same idea about what the "best" domicile is?

      Isn't Canada's greatest natural resource it's vast acreage of undevelped land?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    23. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by flyingsquid · · Score: 1
      The US is a large country. The "lifestyle of the US" does differ from region to region. To travel to "most places in the US" and get a good appreciation of each would take years. I'm sure Canada is similar.

      Very true. I've been visiting NYC a lot in recent years and have really come to like it. It's extremely active, extremely alive, very intense, and people are direct, which I find refreshing. And they're actually not all that hostile, I've even heard New Yorkers tell me that the city has gotten nicer in the past 10 years. On the other hand, I don't know if I could live there 24/7/365. I also spent a few years in San Francisco and really didn't like it for some reason: sure the people were artsy and alternative, but in a way that seemed pretentious and fake. Just my take on things. For the time being I'm in Alberta. It's got it's plusses and minuses.

      On the plus side, it's wholesome. Students seem to use less drugs and alcohol than in the states, despite (or because of?) the fact that alcohol is legal for 18-year-olds to drink. I get in a lot less trouble than I used to. I get to do the work I want to. Crime is low, the air is good. Coyotes and grouse run wild just a couple blocks north of the city core. People aren't as knife-in-your-back competitive. Canadians are more into cooperation and compromise than Americans, and it's useful to get exposed to that way of working things.

      On the minus side... it's so damn wholesome (one of my former profs, who married a Canadian, called it "oppressively wholesome"). It's nice to be able to get in a bit of trouble once in a while, and America is just a more edgy, trouble-making kind of a place. Alberta is not quite square, it's *cubical*. Sure, the people are extremely polite and tolerant. But there's a world of difference between polite and nice, and there's a world of difference between being tolerant and being accepting. I don't find the people here to be all that polite, or all that accepting. Most of all, the place is... boring. People seem to find their little ruts and get stuck in them. It's like America was supposed to be in the 50s. Parts of the city are beautiful, but the sprawl of the suburbs is an eyesore- like this suburban oilslick spreading out across the prairies. Also, Alberta has a very mercenary mindset, in that sense it's got some of the worst qualities of America. Still, it beats the shit out of the South Side of Chicago (but then, so does any place I've lived). Even with forty degree below winters. Anyhow, I'm sure I've offended some people. I tend to do that a lot, I'm opinionated and pessimistic.

      Oh yeah, another thing you have to deal with in Canada is Canadian insecurity. Canadians are really into listening to Canadian music and reading Canadian books and going to a Canadian store like Tim Horton's: it's this defensive reaction to the insecurity and identity crisis they feel living next to the States and consuming our culture (or lack thereof). They constantly feel the need to defend themselves as not being an extension of the United States- it's a sort of mix of dislike and envy, sort of like a little brother syndrome. Of course, Canada is its own country with it's own culture. That being said, being a white, middle-class Canadian is not that different from being a middle-class white American, when compared to, say, black vs. white America. I was on BART in San Fran listening to a black youth telling a story to his buddies: "Nigger say this, nigger do that, nigger niggered that..." the general gist of it was a guy talking about someone installing a car stereo (as far as I could follow). However, the language, the mannerisms, the culture animating the discussion- listening in on their conversation I might have well been in a separate continent.

      My favorite part about Alberta is its rural areas. People are nicer. Great wildlife and geology. Nothing beats hiking through the badlands in winter, finding dinosaur teeth strewn everywhere, hearing the choruses of coyotes sound off at dusk.

    24. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by cpangelich · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Americans, alas, have distinctly moved towards regarding the world as a dog-eat-dog one, with wars and militias as standard features.

      Don't make the mistake of judging all Americans by our 'elected' leader who barely won either of his two elections. A large number of Americans would've preferred otherwise.

      --
      Charles Angelich
    25. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Just+Another+Poster · · Score: 1
      And I'll bet that they don't live as long, either.

      Canadians live longer than Angolans despite their socialist health care system. That Americans spend more per capita on health care is probably because more of it is available in the U.S. with a wider range of options.

    26. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by jZnat · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, another thing you have to deal with in Canada is Canadian insecurity. Canadians are really into listening to Canadian music and reading Canadian books and going to a Canadian store like Tim Horton's: it's this defensive reaction to the insecurity and identity crisis they feel living next to the States and consuming our culture (or lack thereof). They constantly feel the need to defend themselves as not being an extension of the United States- it's a sort of mix of dislike and envy, sort of like a little brother syndrome.

      Sounds sorta like Texas, but they're more about continuing to prove that they ain't no potbellied city boys from the US; they're fucking Texans, and if you mess with them, Texas will fucking kill you. It sounds pretty good (and is for many), but only if you're a bit conservative. Texas always had and always will have that ego where Texas > j00 basically.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    27. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Fishead · · Score: 1

      Dude, you make me wanna move back to Alberta!

      We rented a mobile home on the corner of a cattle ranch outside of Bowden. I paid significantly less then I do for a basement suite in Vancouver, and the landlords left the corner we lived on covered in dense forest for privacy.

      Traffic was non-existant. If there were too many cars on the road you were taking, you could just head a couple miles west and find a different road.

      I remember waking up one night thinking I was hearing sirens, but it was just a coyote fight in the back yard. I much prefer coyotes to the sort of noise I hear in the city.

      I have only been to a few places in USA, and honestly, I like some USA places more then I like some Canadian places. I guess it all depends on where you are. I have recently been to Europe on business several times, and am always happy to get back home.

      You wouldn't happen to know of any job opportunities in the Marine Electronics industry in Alberta would you? ;-)

    28. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by flyingsquid · · Score: 1
      My impression of Texas: Texans are more proud of being Texans, than they are proud of being Americans. And they are pretty damn proud of being Americans.

      -----

      One day, there's a Texan in the bar, bragging about Texas. "Things are big in Texas", he says. "The cows are huge in Texas. The oil fields," he says, "are huge in Texas. The ranches are big in Texas. EVERYTHING is bigger in Texas."

      To which an Alaskan replies, "If you don't shut up, we're gonna split Alaska in two and make you guys the THIRD largest state."

    29. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Rayonic · · Score: 1
      Americans, alas, have distinctly moved towards regarding the world as a dog-eat-dog one, with wars and militias as standard features.

      Because all the governments of the world are as reasonable and democratic as Canada's, right?

      Naive.
    30. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by rikkards · · Score: 1

      My wife got an MRI in less than 3 weeks last February in Ottawa and from what it sounds like it has only got better as they have allowed more hours a day for MRI scheduling

    31. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by HeroreV · · Score: 1

      Sounds sorta like Texas, but they're more about continuing to prove that they ain't no potbellied city boys from the US
      Dallas is one of the fattest cities in the world, and I've never seen anyone get pissed about being referred to as a city boy. It's the hick stereotype that everyone hates.

      they're fucking Texans, and if you mess with them, Texas will fucking kill you.
      Haha. Heck yeah!

    32. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by pastafazou · · Score: 1

      hate to burst your bubble, but you're wrong on a couple of points. According to the 1999 International Crime Victimization Survey, Canada had a 1.5 times higher rate of "contact crime" (robbery, sexual assault, and assault with force) than the US. In fact, aside from homicide, crime rates in Canada are pretty much equal to those of US rates. And in regards to Canada's health care being the best? HAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!! In 2000 Canada ranked 30th in the world according to the World Health Organization. Don't know where we stand now, but I'm sure we've dropped some since then. The biggest problem with Canada are the ignorant Canadians who think they're so much better than everybody else but don't take the time to actually do the comparison. Since 1976 when Canada and the US had pretty much equal average per capita incomes, things have gone downhill for Canada. We now earn on average one third less than Americans. Our "sacred" health care system is in a dire mess while Canadians rant and rave about not wanting any privatization in the health care system. There are only three countries in the world where you are not allowed to buy a medical procedure: North Korea, Cuba, and Canada. Tens of thousands of Canadians travel abroad each year to seek medical procedures, many of them paid for by the Canadian health care system. But you have to leave the country in order to get the treatment you need. It's pathetic. Canadians need to wake up and learn the facts, and stop repeating the lies that have been fed to them for the last twenty years. The most successful health care systems in the world have a good balance of public and private care.

    33. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by cass1010 · · Score: 1

      I moved to Dallas 5 years ago from Calgary and this whole "Don't mess with Texas" thing is more of a marketing slogan than an attitude. On the other hand the idea of Canadian insecurity is very real. Martin Short had a great line on Letterman(?) one night. He said "the difference between Canadians and Americans is that Americans watch TV and Canadians watch American TV". As a Canadian you are accutely aware of what is yours and what is thiers.

    34. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by scowling · · Score: 1

      Wait times are overstated. I have never had to wait more than six hours for an MRI or to see a specialist. Yes, there are people who wait months for life-saving procedures. They are the exception, not the rule. You don't read about the people who receive good care, because that's not news. The squeaky wheel gets the press.

      The majority of increaed spending going to the wages of current staff, not to new staff, procedures or equipment. If Canada switches to a public-private system, the cost of health care per capita will increase and services to those who cannot afford private care will drop.

      We are at the limit of our efficiency. We cannot make the system more effective or more efficient by any means, nor should be try. The current system works.

      --
      www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
    35. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Almost all things nerdy somehow had something to do with a canadian.

      Sad but true.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    36. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by DrJimbo · · Score: 1
      AC asked:
      Then why do US patients have greater access to advanced medical technology than do Canadians?
      If this is true, the obvious reason is that in Canada everyone has access to the health care system. In the US, if someone is a patient, that presupposes that they are one of the lucky ones who either have health insurance or are fabulously wealthy.

      It is a no-brainer that if you exclude a large portion of your population from the health care system, especially the poorer people, then the ones that do have access will have more resources available.

      --
      We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
      -- Anais Nin
    37. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      The army mostly does peacekeeping these days.
      Americans, alas, have distinctly moved towards regarding the world as a dog-eat-dog one, with wars and militias as standard features.


      Perhaps you don't realize the reason for this. Most of the world is a pretty shitty place, but we Canadians don't have to worry about that or about paying for an army to defend ourselves or others because we mostly ride on the coat-tails of the US army. And the American tax-payers get to pay for that. We don't even say "Thank you". We just hit them with scornful, hypocritical contempt.

    38. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Nos. · · Score: 1

      Not all waiting lists are that long, but to answer you basic question.... because this is the way WE belive OUR country should be run. With a national health care system that provides for every person in the country based on their need, not on their gross income. The US belives differently as is their right. This is why generally speaking, Canada is considered a Socialst country and the US a capitalist.

    39. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by neoform · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should try coming here when it's _not_ winter then.. ?

      --
      MABASPLOOM!
    40. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by suitepotato · · Score: 1

      and are well respected by most of the World.

      As the descendant of immigrants of too many nationalities to enumerate in short order, we here in the USA aren't exactly jonesing for the respect of a world that keeps farking things up so bad that signifigant portions of their population don't simply talk about moving to another country like the poser leftists here, they actually do it, and quite frequently risk their lives to do it. You sh*t on the US, you sh*t on all those people who came here fleeing tyranny, villainy, and all the other attrocious crimes perpetrated on their citizenry by so many of the countries of "most of the world". No one in my family has forgotten, not three or five generations later.

      Not surprisingly, the most nasty rhetoric comes from young people right here in the USA who think the world should be provided to them on a silver platter and whine because it isn't while peers of their age group are busy risking life and limb to come here and build what they want on life because they see the opportunities some of the people who've been here three or five generations don't. All I can do is shake my head in disgust for this idiotic mindset and remain thankful that there are always others willing to take the productive place in society these dipsticks throw away willfully.

      --
      If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
    41. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that waiting lists for basic medical procedures show that there's some breakdown in the way things are run up there. Why force people who live up there at gunpoint to subscribe to a one size fits all service? Why don't you allow people who don't want to be a part of the system to opt out? If it is so great, why is being a part of it mandatory?

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    42. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Aeron65432 · · Score: 1
      As an American, I disagree. I believe Canada has gone the way of Europe with socialism and a cradle-to-grave social net, whereas America has tried to keep government out of most affairs.

      We Americans regard the world as dog-eat-dog because of the unique situation we are in, as the only superpower. There isn't worldwide hatred/love for Canada because it's actions rarely have worldwide implications. (Not to demean you or anything) Therefore we naturally have more enemies than Canada.

      I do get the feeling though our military is sadly not necessarily the United States Armed Forces as much as the Western Civilization Armed Forces. We seem to have to fight the West's battles. :(

    43. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Just+Another+Poster · · Score: 1
      Fuck, you're stupid. You spend more and don't live as long. That makes your system less efficient and less effective. Period.

      Comparing life expectancy amongst different nations is not a valid measure of the effectiveness of health care due to differences in populations, lifestyle choices, etc.

      Canada's socialist health system works. Your fascist health system doesn't.

      Yes, as fascism is a form of socialism, Canada's "health care" system can be called 'fascist' as well. As per Merriam-Webster:

      Main Entry: fascism

      1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

      Health care in Canada can certainly be considered a case of severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition is a fact, as one cannot open up a private clinic and charge for services without being threatened with imprisonment or death by the State.

    44. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by birge · · Score: 1

      Of course you have the best health care system in the world: it's OURS, but with government mandated below-market prices. Canada's health care "system" (if that's what you can call a parasitic socialist bureucracy) wouldn't function for a minute without the US.

    45. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Bloggins · · Score: 1

      SHUDUP.... we got enough of them.

    46. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      But I get two weeks vacation each year. I wouldn't want to waste it in a place where I'd only be able to enjoy snow-free weather for half that time.

      --
      resigned
    47. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by BallyHigh · · Score: 1

      >we have the best health care system in the world
      Err .. unless in our Canadian math 30 now equals 'best' I'd beg to differ:
      http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/threads/showflat.p hp?Cat=&Number=470

      Not only that, but not even counting our ageing baby boomer canucks, it's estimated that by 2026 at our current rate of growth health care expenses will account for 100% of our provincial tax base...

      All that PLUS Quebec has the b*mb!

    48. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by scowling · · Score: 1

      Your experience, again, is exceptional, not the rule. And I doubt that it's the truth.

      --
      www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
    49. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by davecb · · Score: 1
      Neither is true, but both are widely believed...

      I have elderly relatives, all of whom have gotten good, rapid care, and I've been able to walk in the door and get non-emergency care at my local clinic in an hour.

      When I needed emergency care it was apparently as quick: I don't know as I was unconscious at the time (:-)) Last week a 99-year old friend got a hip replaceemnt within 24 hours of breaking it. She's in rehab right now, and we're in the city where the waiting lists are the worst.

      So don't believe everything you hear. Some folks have a vested interest in overstating the real problems and making others up out of whole cloth.

      Hint: germs (and broken bones) are not price-elastic, so insurance against them is always sustainable. Drug and cat-scan costs are price-elastic, so costs and/or waits do grow with demand.

      --dave

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    50. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by evilad · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's your driving I'm concerned about. People with attitudes like yours shouldn't be allowed out of doors, let alone put in control of machinery.

    51. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by ksheff · · Score: 1

      You don't even know what my attitude is, so I'd say you are the one that should be confined.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    52. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Nos. · · Score: 1

      You obviously don't understand how the system works. What you're proposing would ensure that the system would fail miserably.

      Go poll people living at the poverty line in both countries. I'll bet that people in Canada are happier than their US counterparts. In your eyes, this doesn't mean the system is a success. In our eyes, seeing that those without the means to "opt-out" can still receive the same services, at the same level, as those with money, means the system is doing what is was designed to do. Prioritize based on need, not the ability to pay for it.

    53. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      So, basically, because some people get better service justifies everyone else getting crappier service? Seems silly to me.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    54. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Nos. · · Score: 1

      No, you completely misunderstand a socialist system, and I'm not going to take the time needed to explain the differences between capitalism, socialism, and communism to you. If you're that interested, read this. There's links in there to capitalism and communism as well.

    55. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Misunderstand because I point out that socialism almost invariably causes shortages and inefficiencies? While I feel that there are weaknesses in the American system, I don't see how that completely nationalizing the health care system will do anything other than cause shortages, create a net loss in skilled medical employees and stagnate the industry as is happening up there. Again, why would a market economy, with help for those who truely need it, be so bad? There are other systems that would work, such as the Dutch system, where people who truely can't afford insurance are given stipends to purchase insurance, with everyone else expected to be responsible for themselves. What would be so wrong with that system?

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    56. Re:The lifestyle IS different! by Just+Another+Poster · · Score: 1
      As I said, Canada's life expectancy is higher among the same demographics. It is the best measure.

      It is not a valid measure, because even within the same demographic groups between nations, there may be differences in lifestyle, culture, etc.

      Statistics Canada also does not break down life expectancy statistics by race, it is not possible to compare life expectancies between different racial groups with those of the US.

      Uh, no. Fascism is a form of corporatism. It is the antithesis of socialism.

      Corporatism is a form of syndicalism - guild socialism. It does not refer to business corporations.

      From Wikipedia:

      Historically, corporatism or corporativism (Italian corporativismo) is a political system in which legislative power is given to civic assemblies that represent economic, industrial, agrarian, and professional groups. Unlike pluralism, in which many groups must compete for control of the state, in corporatism, certain unelected bodies take a critical role in the decision-making process. These corporatist assemblies are not the same as contemporary business corporations or incorporated groups.

      "The word "corporatism" is derived from the Latin word for body, corpus. This original meaning was not connected with the specific notion of a business corporation, but rather a general reference to anything collected as a body.

      Canada has no death penalty.

      So what happens when somebody exercises his fundamental right to use his resources to open a for-pay medical center in Canada, and rightfully resists all attempts by the State to shut him down?

      Do the authorities plead with him? Do they ask him very nicely to stop?

      Again: fuck, you're stupid.

      Pot. Kettle. Black.

  5. ho by mr_tommy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Psst... I think the similarity is part of the atraction....

  6. Re:Rather to Alabama by mordors9 · · Score: 2, Funny

    What are you a Hurrican chaser?

  7. Oh, Canada! by Hiro+Antagonist · · Score: 4, Informative

    Given that I travel up to B.C. about twice a year, and that I'm going to be looking for employment up north after I graduate (two years down the road), I say 'Hell, yes!'

    No worries about healthcare, low crime, fantastic local beers, hockey in the winter, Tim Hortons...er, what am I not supposed to like, again?

    --

    --
    I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy .sig.
    1. Re:Oh, Canada! by CarlinWithers · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Consider Alberta as a place to look for work. Our two major cities (Edmonton and Calgary) are the fastest growing in Canada. There's lots of IT employment available if you have the skills, heck there's lots of most kinds of employment. We currently have a shortage of skilled workers, and a jobless rate of less than 5%. It's not quite as beautiful or warm as BC, but it's still nice. I'm a Calgarian myself. When I compare the quality of life in Calgary to most other places, the results are enough to motivate me to tough out the weather. Course, sometimes I've got to take holidays to somewhere warm.

    2. Re:Oh, Canada! by ocelotbob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I prefer california, actually. Better beers, crime's a bit of a problem but getting better, My employer has a great healthcare plan, and if they didn't, it's only $30/month for heath care to cover true emergencies, oh, and I'm 1/2 mile from a major hockey venue, and a mile from an amateur venue. What's there to love about having to wait 5 minutes for your car to warm up in the winter, or generally higher taxes?

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    3. Re:Oh, Canada! by Shelled · · Score: 1
      Calgary is the friendliest place I ever lived, so long as I kept my Toronto origins under wraps. =D Though there's much complaining housing prices are very reasonable too.

      Vancouver however is rampant with petty crime. Surrey was purpotedly the car theft capital of North America. Drug crime is everywhere. Housing prices are insane, not a 400 square foot bungalow under a half mill within 40 minutes of downtown. And interestingly enough, no area cranks out the serial killers like the Pacific Northwest: Pickton, Green River, Olson. Must be something in the water.

    4. Re:Oh, Canada! by paranode · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hey I have all of that in the rural United States only we are not deluded that a several-month waiting list to see a doctor is the 'best healthcare'.

    5. Re:Oh, Canada! by fbjon · · Score: 1

      I don't know about Canada, but every car in Finland has a heating element built into the engine, which can be connected to a power socket in a locked box next to your parking space. The sockets are turned on in the early morning, so the engine is ready to go by the time people start to wake up & move about. With this, even a 30-year old car will start in the morning of a -20C degree day.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    6. Re:Oh, Canada! by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      And if you forget to plug it in, you're back at square one. I'd rather live some place hospitible year-round and not have to worry about such nonsense.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    7. Re:Oh, Canada! by fbjon · · Score: 1

      True, but then again, most sensible countries of the world are up north. The further south you go, the hairier it tends to get, with some exceptions.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    8. Re:Oh, Canada! by Hiro+Antagonist · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You know, I keep hearing about this, but none of my Canadian friends have ever mentioned it; I mean, I'm not saying it doesn't ever happen, but I don't think it's the big problem that a bunch of Americans make it out to be. Hell, last time my friend Sarah got sick with a nasty cold (!), the local hospital offered to send out an AMBULANCE to pick her up.

      On the flip side, if you're a student in the US, you can shell out $100 a month for CRAP healthcare -- as in, if the Student Heath Center is open and you don't go there first, you can pay your own bills, and unless it's an emergency (life-threatening), you had better not even think of going to see a doctor, because the student insurance won't cover it. Oh, and it won't cover anything out-of-network, so I owe my dentist $150 because the student insurance I forked out about won't cover cleanings with my regular dentist.

      At least I have healthcare; half of the people I go to school with don't, because $100 a month is more than they can afford.

      Now that I'm working 'full time' again, things are better (back to real healthcare), but having experienced 'cheap healthcare' for a year, I'd rather see us Americans with a better system.

      I hate to say it, but I think the Japanese have something going with the way they run things -- even without being on the 'National Insurance', I was able to go to a Japanese clinic and have my cough diagnosed as a really nasty case of pneumonia -- and was out the door after a total of an hour, with a small bag filled with about five different kinds of medication, and all for about $200 (IIRC). I shudder to think of what two sets of chest X-rays and about two weeks of meds would have cost in the U.S. without insurance.

      --

      --
      I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy .sig.
    9. Re:Oh, Canada! by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1
      We have electronic fuel injection, which doesn't have to heat up.
      Bullshit. I've seen plenty of fuel injected cars that couldn't start in cold weather.
      My first car was a 1981 Chevy Malibu, with a 267 V8 and 2 barrel carb. Never had a problem starting it in cold weather, even in the -30F we hit one of the first couple of winters I drove it.

      True, a poorly tuned carburetted engine will be a pig to start in cold weather, but the same can be said for fuel injection. If you've got crappy plugs or wires, you're not going to get it running. Actually had this problem with my current car (1998 Saturn) last winter. The plugs weren't that old, but they were platinum ones, which I put in because they last longer. Turns out the "high energy" modern electronic ignition system didn't have enough guts to spark them properly in -25 degree weather, and I had to go back to regular plugs.

      The old Malibu had platinum plugs installed shortly after I got it, along with my next car, a 1985 Camaro, and the one after that, an 84 Pontiac Grand Prix. The only injected one of these was the Camaro. None of them ever had problems starting in cold weather, even with the platinum plugs. All three were using an older design HEI distributor ignition system, too, rather than the distributorless one the Saturn has. Yet the modern one is the one that has problems with the cold.

      I know, I know. Anecdotal evidence. But the point is, electronic fuel injection isn't the solution to all cold weather starting problems.
      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    10. Re:Oh, Canada! by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Actually, a couple friends of mine moved to BC from Alberta (Edmonton, specifically) for work, and returned after a couple years specifically because housing is so unbelievably, ridiculously expensive. They now own a 2100 sq ft house... something which would have been impossible in BC. Alberta is definitely a good alternative... the climate's certainly more harsh, but there's tons of work, and with the money the tar sands are pulling in, we'll probably see much improvement to healthcare, infrastructure, etc.

    11. Re:Oh, Canada! by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I used to live in Great Falls, MT. Every weekend, swarms of Alberta residents came south to shop. I'm not sure that counts as "somewhere warm" :) That general region is a nice stable place to live and raise a family, tho -- if you can take the weather, probably among the best in the world.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    12. Re:Oh, Canada! by BlindSpot · · Score: 1

      Consider Alberta as a place to look for work. Our two major cities (Edmonton and Calgary) are the fastest growing in Canada. There's lots of IT employment available if you have the skills, heck there's lots of most kinds of employment. We currently have a shortage of skilled workers, and a jobless rate of less than 5%. It's not quite as beautiful or warm as BC, but it's still nice. I'm a Calgarian myself. When I compare the quality of life in Calgary to most other places, the results are enough to motivate me to tough out the weather. Course, sometimes I've got to take holidays to somewhere warm.

      Agreed, it's quite nice here overall. Though it is admittedly difficult for those of us with more liberal (more Slashdot-style) beliefs, as conservatism rules here. Nevertheless the people are usually much more tolerant than our elected officials make it seem, and yeah overall there's enough that's great about the place to make you stay.

      Warm holidays are good of course but here (in Calgary especially) we do at least get spared the full brunt of a long cold winter thanks to the Chinook winds. Example: Earlier this week it was 20 degrees (~70F) because of one. Now it's gone, and tomorrow it will be -11 (~15F). (The tradeoff for the periodic warmth is the massive fluctuation, which causes people all sorts of health problems.)

      I did a road trip through the western US earlier this year and got to experience a lot of the country. Yes there are a lot of similarities, but a lot of definite differences too. I just could never see myself moving to the US of my own accord, though I certainly could if I had to (due to job, love, invasi...err...wait scratch that one).

    13. Re:Oh, Canada! by oudzeeman · · Score: 1
      I live in Maine - Portland has a Tim Hortons, as do many of the nothern comunities. We have low crime, great local beers, and hockey in the winter. Health care isn't much of an issue - if you have a decent job, you'll have insurance. Portland and Bangor have large hospitals, and Boston is close for high-risk or rare surgeries. Maine recently created DirigoChoice - health care coverage designed for self-employed or compaines with less than 50 employees - enrolees recieve discounts based on income/family size and discounts can be up to 100%.

      I happen to work at a very large genetic research facility (the worlds largest mammalian genetics research institution) located in a very beautiful part of maine. I live in Bangor - one of the safest small cities in the country. And houses in the city are reasonably priced - I looked at a 2000 square foot 4 bed room house for $160,000, and it just needed an updated kitchen and some new color schemes. This was in a in town neighborhoot established in the 50s so it only had about .11 acres of land. A big house in a new subdivision with .5+ acres will run 250,000 - 400,000. Things are even more afordable if you move just 15 minutes away.

    14. Re:Oh, Canada! by paranode · · Score: 1

      Ah but it only stays 'free' until you get that real job. Then you will pay for it twice over in taxes.

    15. Re:Oh, Canada! by Hiro+Antagonist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've had a real job before; left it to go back and finish up my degrees. Given what the government charges me in taxes, and what they spend on pork-barrel programs for defense contractors, I think they can afford to spend some money to give the lower-class citizens some basic healthcare, and let us higher-ups pay for better care if we want to.

      --

      --
      I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy .sig.
    16. Re:Oh, Canada! by RamblerRandy · · Score: 1

      Well, how about freezing your p***** off, wishing you can just jump in your car at 5 AM and head to the nearby market in your pajamas to get a iced coffee (they have that there in Canuck Country?), having to live like a hermit because your nearest neighbor is 5 miles away, the nearest town 50, going bezerk and killing your girlfriend (an uncle did this in the North), wondering why there isn't a Starbucks next door, having so say "eh" at the end of every sentence, all the good actors head south to the U.S. to star in Star Trek and other sci fi, missing out on all the political and social nightmares of living in the U.S., and so on... Hmm, I can't make up my mind, can you?

      --
      I'll think of a really good SIG just before I die.
  8. Empty promise by uncleO · · Score: 5, Informative

    For those unaware of Canadian politics, the government faces a non-confidence vote Monday or Tuesday. It is expected to fall and call a December election.

    For campaign reasons, the government has announced a flurry of new spending over the last week, most of which is expected to never materialise, whether the governing party wins again or not.

    1. Re:Empty promise by tomstdenis · · Score: 2

      Very true, mod parent up. This is right up there with the cancellation of the gun registry and GST...

      Of course where is the gun registry office? [hint: How do you keep unemployable easterners happy...]

      That said, I'd rather live in Canada than the USA. Mostly because it's so cold the terrorists are few and far between. Who the fuck would bomb an office in -20C weather? :-)

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    2. Re:Empty promise by JacobO · · Score: 1

      How do you keep unemployable easterners happy

      It's not just those from Western Canada and the Prairies that are dumbfounded by the gun registry. I would say that besides the few lucky folks who might now have a job because of it, the rest are just as ignorant of it or against it as everyone else.

      While we're talking Canada, "go Sens!"

    3. Re:Empty promise by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Yeah, well it's still kinda odd that all these wasteful government programs end up in Quebec or those other provinces [quite frankly I forgot their names, cuz really I don't care about them].

      Ontario largely makes or breaks foreign trade with countries like the USA but we still get played up as the villains and betrayed by the government every chance they get.

      Fuck this, I'm moving to BC. At least they have a "no french" policy. :-)

      Tom

      P.S. anyone got bus fare?

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    4. Re:Empty promise by yabos · · Score: 1

      It's not so much a non confidence vote so much as it is Steven Harper sees a way to snake his way into office. His whole story about conservatives being incorrupt unlike the Liberals is a crock. All the politicians are the same.

    5. Re:Empty promise by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      It's not so much a non confidence vote so much as it is Steven Harper sees a way to snake his way into office. His whole story about conservatives being incorrupt unlike the Liberals is a crock. All the politicians are the same.

      Um...that's a non-confidence vote - the majority of parliament doesn't agree with the government.

      However I, and many others in the 905, will be voting for the Conservatives. The desperate Liberal bribery is grossly offensive, as is the absolutely pathetic pandering to the immigrant vote (many of whom are offended by it - irrational exhuberance about something as critical and volative as immigration quotas is absolutely insane, and it does no one a favour when the Liberals flood Toronto with unwanted and unmatched labour to try to buy votes)

    6. Re:Empty promise by ergo98 · · Score: 1
      For those unaware of Canadian politics, the government faces a non-confidence vote Monday or Tuesday. It is expected to fall and call a December election.

      Not to mention that the submission implies something completely different than the actual article states (demonstrated by the tone of many of the comments). Canada isn't trying to retain skilled workers (e.g. the "brain drain"), the government of the day (for a short time) is trying to spend billions pandering both to

      The immigrant community

      The business community

      The former is obvious, but the later is more insidious - "Can't beat your IT workers down to $8 an hour? Okay - we'll bring in 100,000 more to try to help out with this `skill shortage'.

    7. Re:Empty promise by yabos · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the way they are using it is a sham. They don't really care about how the gov't is performing, they only see an opportunity to get themselves a better position.

    8. Re:Empty promise by xs650 · · Score: 1
      For campaign reasons, the government has announced a flurry of new spending over the last week, most of which is expected to never materialise, whether the governing party wins again or not.

      That is major differance. In the US, the politicians promise they will reduce spending,then spend more than has ever been spent before.

    9. Re:Empty promise by Quobobo · · Score: 1

      Could I interest you in the NDP instead, good sir? Let's try to distance ourselves a little further from our neighbour to the south.

    10. Re:Empty promise by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      His whole story about conservatives being incorrupt unlike the Liberals is a crock. All the politicians are the same - perhaps you can explain to me how is a convicted murderer is the same as a potential murderer? Can you explain that? Ok, thought so. The Bliberals are proven to be corrupt (you know what I am talking about - the sponsorship scandal) and saying that other parties are the same is just plain bullshit and closing your eyes to the truth: bliberals must be removed from power.

    11. Re:Empty promise by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Could I interest you in the NDP instead, good sir? Let's try to distance ourselves a little further from our neighbour to the south. - no way in hell. Conservative always, in all levels of government. Fiscally conservative of-course, since I don't give a damn about social questions, only money counts.

    12. Re:Empty promise by yabos · · Score: 1

      Both will go to jail. The Conservatives will screw up the government as well, they did before and they will again just as the Liberals do.

    13. Re:Empty promise by ppanon · · Score: 1

      So did you vote for Mulroney? You know Mulroney, the guy who ran up most of Canada's deficit.

      If you think conservatives are incorruptible, you might want to take a look at what's been happening to Conrad Black and his Hollinger partners. If you think he's the only ardent Conservative supporter who is ethically challenged, you're dreaming.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    14. Re:Empty promise by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      No, I did not vote for that guy because I only came to Canada 12 years ago and I did not say that Conservatives are incorruptible. What I am saying is that Liberals are proven thieves by a judge. Proven theives must not run this country.

    15. Re:Empty promise by Quobobo · · Score: 1

      Still.... "I don't give a damn about social questions, only money counts" is a pretty irresponsible way of thinking IMHO. Or did you word that wrongly?

    16. Re:Empty promise by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Or did you word that wrongly? - no, I worded it the way I feel it. Don't get me wrong, I do my part, I build Free Software for example but I would rather give donations and build free software than pay any taxes.

    17. Re:Empty promise by Quobobo · · Score: 1

      Building free software doesn't contribute to all the public things we take advantage of (roads, transit, public schools, government). Nor do donations (unless you're planning on donating to all those things, in which case taxes are no different).

      I think I understand where you're coming from, but I'm quite happy paying for all these essential services. My tax dollars help others, and myself.

    18. Re:Empty promise by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Building free software doesn't contribute to all the public things we take advantage of (roads, transit, public schools, government). Nor do donations (unless you're planning on donating to all those things, in which case taxes are no different). - oh, no, donations are much different from taxes. Donations go to a specific cause and if I care about roads I will donate to that cause. I, however, do not care about schools and all the property taxes that I pay I consider money wasted, because I have no kids, my girlfriend has no kids, we are not even considering kids and if we had kids anyway they would go to a private school.

      I am totally against taxes, because I don't care about most things my taxes money are wasted on there. I don't want to use tax sponsored health care, I want to buy my own insurance ( I am working on that, but in Canada unfortunately you can't buy real health insurance like in the States, the most expensive 'health insurance' that I am buying is a joke compared to what health insurance would provide me with to the South of the border.) I would rather pay road tolls and see good highways everywhere, like 407, rather than garbage highways - like 401. And I want private companies to bid and compete and build these things: roads, hospitals, schools rather than 'the government'.

    19. Re:Empty promise by ppanon · · Score: 1

      Then why not move down to the US? It seems they are doing most of what you want. Not that I'm a Canada-love it or leave it-kind of guy. But seriously, if you're that opposed to the historical governing practices of Canada for most of the last 40 years, why move there?

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    20. Re:Empty promise by ppanon · · Score: 1

      Proven theives must not run this country.

      They aren't. The proven thieves have been fired and are being pursued. Unlike the US Administration, Martin hasn't been stupid enough to try to cover up the wrongdoing. He probably would have preferred if it hadn't gotten so much press and Chretien hadn't left him that bomb under the desk.

      Apparently the last few long-time leaders have done the same to their successors: Trudeau (Turner), Mulroney (Campbell), and now Chretien (Martin). "Apres moi, le deluge" seems to be the hallmark of Canadian politics. I haven't seen anything from Harper that leads me to believe he would change that trend; McKay should watch his back.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    21. Re:Empty promise by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Read this article. I would love to see Harper make it to the P.M.'s office and implement this. If he becomes a P.M. and does not implement what he promises here, I will agree that Cons are no better than the Blibs. Until then I give benefit of the doubt to the Cons and completely dismiss Blibs as garbage.

    22. Re:Empty promise by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Funny you should say, I am looking forward my next contract, which I am going to look for in the US of A.

    23. Re:Empty promise by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      By the way, for how long are you going to be basing your views about the Conservative by that Mulroney guy? As far as I know there is basically noone in the current Conservative party left from those times, it's a totally new set of people.

    24. Re:Empty promise by ppanon · · Score: 1

      Heh. In his first campaign speech, Harper says that he will be villified by the opposition, and then immediately hands his opponents a chance to brand him as a crypto-homophobe by trying to play to the religious right wing portion of his base and saying he wants to re-open the same-sex marriage issue. He lost the last election on this same image issue and he's determined to repeat the same mistake starting with his first speech! This guy doesn't deserve to be leader of the opposition, let alone prime minister.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
  9. Re:Rather to Alabama by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    No, but i'd still like it better than Canada, i think..

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  10. So what are geek wages like? by Elrac · · Score: 1

    Are there jobs available in reasonable numbers and at reasonable rates for, umm Java/J2EE programmers? Sysadmins? Systems architects? Other geek professions?

    I'd go in a heartbeat if I could get my girlfriend to uproot.

    --
    When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Rel
    1. Re:So what are geek wages like? by Hannah+E.+Davis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think it depends on what part of the industry you're looking at. The games industry, for example, is very big here in Vancouver -- my boyfriend works for EA, and I'm going to be doing a co-op job (that's an internship, for you American types) in January at a small startup game company. To my knowledge, a lot of American companies, particularly those of the video game persuasion, are actually outsourcing to Canada because thanks to public healthcare and other perks, we're cheaper to employ.

      Also, it probably doesn't mean much, but all of my friends who are recent computer science grads managed to find jobs very soon after graduation. I don't know how their wages were, but I haven't heard any complaints.

    2. Re:So what are geek wages like? by PygmySurfer · · Score: 1

      Are there jobs available in reasonable numbers and at reasonable rates for, umm Java/J2EE programmers? Sysadmins? Systems architects? Other geek professions?

      No. I actually had to come to Michigan to find a job. Of course, I live in Windsor - Automotive Capital of Canada (and not much else). Toronto, BC, Calgary and Edmonton all likely have much better opportunities for someone looking for work in IT.

      I suppose I get the best of both worlds - work in the US, but still live in Canada. If only the damn US dollar would turn around. :)

    3. Re:So what are geek wages like? by larry_larry · · Score: 1

      An APEGBC survey reports that in British Columbia in 2002 the average salary for computer engineers was $81,254 CAD and for EEs this was $89,308. [Today US$/CA$ = .8551] Seems there are lots of jobs in Vancouver, Calgary, Ottawa, Toronto, Waterloo... Check Craig's List/Monster to see.

    4. Re:So what are geek wages like? by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

      My boyfriend?...

      <looks at /. ID>Hannah?....

      Holy cow, we got a woman here on slashdot!!

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    5. Re:So what are geek wages like? by freeweed · · Score: 1

      Short answer: yes. Long answer: yes, at least in Calgary.

      Someone just coming out of school with a B.C.Sc. can make $45-60,000 here, depending on the company. Considering the average house price runs around $200,000 right now, that ain't half bad for just out of school.

      Add 10 years experience and you should be close to doubling that figure. Mostly though, it's sysadmin/architect work, as nearly all companies here are oil & gas related, so there's very little in-house development work. It does exist, though.

      Oh, and this past month we've been beating southern California for high temperatures. Canada isn't the Arctic, contrary to popluar belief :)

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  11. Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Stone316 · · Score: 5, Informative
    and I don't mean catching a cold or pulling a muscle in your back and having to take a trip to the family doctor. I mean 'sick' and require the attention of specialists.... You can get your dog in for an MRI same day but you'll be waiting months for yours. I believe the average wait for a specialist is about 3 months now... I know I had to wait 6 months (at least, can't remember) to see a specialist last year.

    Well respected? Maybe but I keep sensing that other countries find us about as annoying as a nat flying around your head.

    Saying that, I love this country and would never move.

    --
    "Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
    1. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by wizwormathome · · Score: 5, Interesting
      You can get your dog in for an MRI same day but you'll be waiting months for yours.

      For those who are curious, the above is not an exaggeration, as shown by this film.

      As partially summarized by a Canadian blogger, "When you have finished watching this film several images will remain with you for some time to come. A woman who spent two years waiting for knee surgery and innocently asks the American filmmakers whether the waiting lists are as long there as they are here. The moment when she begins to grasp that a health care waiting list is a concept alien to most sick Americans, though sadly not health care compelled bankruptcy, is something that cannot be explained. More stories follow of addiction to pain killers brought on by wait times, of the suffering families go through, of men and women calmly contemplating death for ailments which medical science long ago conquered, but which government control has placed out of reach."

      --
      An explanation of my choices for friends
    2. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Valar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It takes time to see specialists here in America too. Three months would be rare, but it happens. A lot of it just has to do with the supply and demand for people with specialized medical knowledge. Canada is a little bit worse off because lower wages for doctors->lower # of people willing to be doctors.

    3. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by ThaFooz · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mod parent up. There is a reason weathly Europeans and Canadians often have private doctors (despite the "free" healthcare system) - and flying to Boston is not unheard of for exceptionaly dangerous procedures. While we can argue the merits of applying Capatilism to the health care system - skilled US workers (which would include everyone reading this site in the US) have the best health care. Period.

    4. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by etzel · · Score: 1

      Healthcare in Canada is great if you are poor.

      If you get sick and have some money or private insurance, you can get better service most anywhere else.

      --
      "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
    5. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by hross · · Score: 1

      It's not hard for Canada to spent less and serve more people than the US health care system. But the most obvious impact of this is that high cost services get targeted to those who truly need them. Recently, Herceptin was put on the approved drug list while other less effective treatments were removed. Same amount of money, more people helped. If it isn't you that benefits, you may well feel that you were cheated.

      There are still countries that do it better (i.e. more services, less money) and partner with private health care without having to kill and eat any sacred cows (e.g. France). But this place has worked well for the people I know who needed services. And that included an MRI within a week. Granted, it was at 10PM, but when each unit costs so much they tend to buy fewer and run then closer to 24/7.

      And I've heard people told by their doctor that they would NOT receive some diagnostic test because it did not aid in differential diagnosis (i.e. it wouldn't tell them anything they didn't already know). Since I'm paying for part of that test, I applaud the doctor for being to straight up and not blaming someone else (long waiting lines, low funding) for the choise.

      Often, blaming government is a way to avoid hard feelings. Eveyone wants to help and to be liked. Sick people are not always the best to judge what is reasonable and effective in the circumstance. That said, the internet doesn't hurt either.

    6. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by justins · · Score: 1
      I believe the average wait for a specialist is about 3 months now...

      That kind of wait isn't exactly unprecedented here in the U.S.
      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    7. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by thebudgie · · Score: 1

      Heh, in a hospital local to me (UK) the only benefit privately insured patients get over NHS patients is the chance to have an appointment outside of the usual 9-5 range so they don't miss their job. There's no real additional benefit unless they are actually off for a non-essential procedure which would probably ahve to be done somewhere completely different so it didn't cut into time spent making sure Mr. and Mrs. X are ok. These appointments aren't anything to do with the private insurers, it just depends on whether the staff want to serve the private patients, who tend to be pushy, impulsive, arrogant and generally obnoxious compared to the normal patients. I think private patients get the raw end of the deal sometimes.

    8. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by chaotic_synergy · · Score: 2

      I'm a canadian citizen and a resident of Vancouver BC. I only had to wait a few days for my MRI ...

      It took SIX WEEKS(!!!!) for a standard test to come back with bad news (cells suspicious for cancer). After that things went much much faster ...

      - appointment with a gynocologist 3 days later
      - test results confirming cancer 8 days later
      - appointment with a gyno-oncologist 2 days later
      - MRI 5 days later
      - major abdominal surgery 6 days later.

      In summary, I had my surgery for cancer 1 month and a day after my initial test came back as "cells suspicious for cancer".

      The canadian system needs improvement, but I certainly wouldn't trade it for the american one. I did a LOT of research on cancer when I got sick, and couldn't find anything to recomend theirs over ours.

    9. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Twiceblessedman · · Score: 1

      It really depends on what kind of specialist you need and where you live.

    10. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      'sick' and require the attention of specialists.... You can get your dog in for an MRI same day but you'll be waiting months for yours.

      My dad got sick last wednesday, he got his MRI that night, and two neurosurgeons operated on him the next evening (delay due to his prescription medication needing to flush out of his system before the operation).

      The bill? The ambulance ride and the private rooms's TV cable bill. Less than 200 canadian dolalrs total.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    11. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      There is a reason weathly Europeans and Canadians often have private doctors (despite the "free" healthcare system) - and flying to Boston

      The reason being that the best doctors get offered obscene amounts of money to move to the states.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    12. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by salimma · · Score: 1

      Doctors earn more in the States, but have to pay out more in malpractice premiums.

      --
      Michel
      Fedora Project Contribut
    13. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by starm_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know, its not illegal to cross the border to the south and get your health care there. You have both options in Canada, wait and get it for free or pay for a US specialist.

    14. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by code+addict · · Score: 1

      I'm in Vancouver, BC as well, and didn't experience any usual waits.

      I went to my family doctor (made an appt for later in the week) about a suspicious mole. Once she saw it she referred me to a specialist the next week. He agreed it should be removed, I had surgery 2 weeks later. The biopsy came back 2 weeks later with results that it was Malignant Melanoma and need a wider excision. Had my second surgery 1 week later. Biopsy for that came back clean 2 weeks later. The whole process was very quick.

      All in all, no excessive waiting at all. I've had the same experience with all my medical procedures, even the non life threatening ones. Best of all, all those procedures cost me nothing.

      I have a theory that the long waits are mostly for non-life threatening procedures. Whenever I hear a news story about wait lists it usually seems to be things like back injuries, or joint injuries that aren't life-threatening but do cause a lot of pain.

      One of the best things about a "free" health care system is that you don't wait to see a doctor until it's too late. It encourages early detection. I went even before my mole showed all the tell tale signs of cancer and because of that I caught it early. It that doctor's trip was going to cost me $200 I probably wouldn't have gone. Scary thought.

    15. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by cass1010 · · Score: 1

      I'm stunned it took this long for the great Healthcare debate to start. I see from the replies that the wild generalizations and anecdotal evidence bashing have flowing. My two cents is this: If my grandmother had lived in the US she might not be laid up in a hospital waiting to die from cancer due to problems with the great Canadian healthcare system. Her doctor of 10 years moved to the US and she saw a very green doctor who missed the cancer growth which caused here arm to break and spread throughout her body before she could get in to see a specialist to get a second opinion almost 2 months later. No one on slashdot is a policy maker in either the US or Canada so all that really makes a difference in our lives is anecdotal evidence. I wish other Canadians would stop jumping to the defence of an obviuosly broken system by pointing at the US and yelling they're worse. We do the same thing with racism, class division and every other social problem there is. The fact is that if your are above the poverty line there is very little that is differnet between life in Canada and in the US. Canada's healthcare system and makes life better for those under the poverty line which is a great thing but it does not give us the social/moral superiority I see in posts on Slashdot and hear from some of my friends back home. Hallelujah! Holy Shit! Where's the Tylenol?

    16. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Impotent_Emperor · · Score: 1

      Cable TV bill? What was he doing, watching porn?

    17. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by chris88 · · Score: 1

      Just last night, my step mom went to the hospital for a neck problem. They did an xray, saw that she had "chip" broken off in her neck, and 4 hours later she had her MRI done to determine whether or not it was a threat to her spinal cord.

      What the hell are you talking about? 4 hours is not months.

    18. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by metamatic · · Score: 1
      The moment when she begins to grasp that a health care waiting list is a concept alien to most sick Americans...

      Having any healthcare coverage whatsoever is a concept alien to the majority of Americans.

      I'm assuming the Canadian lady could get private medical treatment in Canada, if she had the money, just like in the UK. Since she's waiting, she presumably doesn't have the money--so in America, she'd be fucked.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    19. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Gramie2 · · Score: 1

      No, I don't think that you grasp the dynamics. As another poster said, it is extremely difficult to get into medical school here; there simply aren't enough places (thanks to "cost-saving" measures introduced by governments that control university funding). There are still plenty of very intelligent people who would make excellent doctors but can't get in.

      When they do graduate, the lure of working in the U.S. is just too much for many new doctors who have over $100,000 in debt. The salary here is probably 50% of the U.S. one (not that $150,000/year or so is anything to sneeze at), and they are likely to have better equipment available to them south of the border.

      So the problem isn't not enough people becoming doctors. It's not enough people becoming doctors and staying here.

    20. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by wizwormathome · · Score: 2, Interesting
      It is my understanding that private healthcare, with the exception of dentistry, is essentially illegal in Canada. So no, she can't get private medical treatment and jump ahead of a line. On the other hand, important folks, like politicians and celebrities either get treatment elsewhere or are bumped ahead, so that there's no reason for the "loud voices" to complain publically.

      The fact that some Americans, like myself, do not have healthcare coverage is too broad a statement to act as a condemnation. There are multiple reasons why some people do not have coverage and not all are automatically immoral. Personally, without coverage, I'm not tied to any particular doctor or healthplan. If I don't like the service I'm getting, I walk along with my money.

      --
      An explanation of my choices for friends
    21. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by AtariEric · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. I am a highly skilled US worker, and I have NO healthcare, and will not live long enough to see it. You need to look a little harder at the system you are worshipping. The US may be good, but it's not the New Christ.

      --
      Don't trust any concentration of power.
    22. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by plopez · · Score: 2, Informative

      though sadly not health care compelled bankruptcy

      No longer true. In the US it has been replaced by health care compelled indentured servitude. The bankruptcy laws have been tightened up so that now it is almost impossible for an individual to write off debts. Despite the fact that approx. 70% of bankruptcy in the US was due to health care bills. In addition, you are forced into counsummer credit counseling, often for profit organizations. Sometimes these counseling services are fraudulent driving the vicitm further into debt.

      You don't know how good you have it up north...

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    23. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by RoundTop-VJAS · · Score: 1

      Actually that is dependant on province. Some provinces (such as Alberta) allow privatized health care in addition to the national.

      British Columbia is also undergoing trials with it. I can't speak for the other provinces, but it is not "illigal" in the sense you are portraying it.

      While wait times can be a hassle sometimes, often it is a matter of where you go.

      eg: My grandmother needed surgery. If she wanted it at the main Vancouver hospital it had a 4-6 month waiting list. If she was willing to go to Abbotsford (~40 miles outside the city core and on the outskirts of the greater Vancouver area), she could get an appointment in 1 month.

      It is simply that too many people think only of their local hospital for these surgeries and the hospitals don't farm out the proceedures to others. If people are willing to go across town it is normally solvable.

      --
      RoundTop

    24. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Milton+Waddams · · Score: 1

      Waiting 3 months to see a specialist isn't too bad if you didn't have to pay for it. I'm living in Ireland where we're supposed to have a public healthcare system. I had to wait 4 months to see a specialist and pay EUR150 for that one visit even though I'm privately insured on top of being entitled to public healthcare (I'd probably have to wait over a year if I was only on public healthcare).

      When I was in Germany, I also had to see a specialist and I had to wait a week. I had to pay EUR10 for 3 months of treatment. Methinks Germany's got the best social welfare system in the world.

    25. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by afidel · · Score: 1

      If you are "highly skilled" and have no health care it is either because you are a consultant a choose not to carry insurance (stupid) or you are working for the wrong employer who fails to provide healthcare to their employees (stupid for not seeking a better employer). Basically anyone making above minimum wage in the US has healthcare available to them, if not with their current employer then through a lateral move. Failure to obtain health insurance for anyone with valuable skills is a stupid set of decisions on their part, not a failing of the healthcare system.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    26. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by ThaFooz · · Score: 1

      I'm going to have to agree with afidel on this one. 99/100 times, the failure to get heath insurance in the US is a result of stupidity - either you don't have the skills to get a halfway decent job, or you're stupid enough to opt out of it or get pushed around by your employer.

      By the way, I never made the claim that US healthcare is perfect. Its just better than socialist health care, thats all. A lot could be done to reduce the cost and increase affordability in the US - IANAL, but it seems like an enormous percentage of the costs associated with the health care system are legal costs (malpractice insurance, FDA approval, settlements) that could be reduced.

    27. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by ThaFooz · · Score: 1

      The reason being that the best doctors get offered obscene amounts of money to move to the states.

      If you are editorializing on that point, I'm not sure what your two cents is. Are you claiming that the US is (immoraly?) poaching doctors from countries that need them, or that Socailist nations are failing to reward the obscene amount of work required to become a doctor and that their resulting mediocre health care system is their own fault?

    28. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I am not American or Canadian, but I lived in both countries for a couple of years. In fact I've lived in 4 countries during the last 5 years (Chile, US, Canada, and France). Based on my experience I think each one has its own advantanges/disadvantages. US has its very "developed economy" and individualist culture that gives more opportunities to people and makes it a vey "CHEAP" place to live. If you do not believe me compare the price of an apartment, car, or PC in any big European city and an American one. Canada has its multicultural/socialist society that makes a very good but "EXPENSIVE" place to live.

      After living in different countries I have realized that the single most important point I consider to move to a new place is the quality of life of their cities. That is more important that higher salary, cheaper computers, etc. You can check the cities with better quality of life at http://www.citymayors.com/features/quality_survey. html. My favorite city in North America, Vancouver, where I lived and I expect to move soon, appears as third one. Please check the position of the first US city.

      When comparing health systems I think it is important to ask what is the main purpose of a health care system. To me a good health care system is the one that can offer a long healthy life to MOST of its population. Go check this page http://www.aneki.com/expectancy.html to see wich country has the longer life expectancy. You can also check other index of social development.
      I visited doctors in the US and Canada. As far as I am concerned the only difference was that in US I got a bill of US$300 plus my insurance coverage while in Canada I did not pay anything else that the provincial health insurance. The quality was the same, I would say a little better and more "human" in Canada.

      I like US, but Americans should recognize that there are a lot of better places to live... I think US IS the largest economic/militar power in the world, but it IS NOT the best place to live or raise my children. I hope Americans will find the energy and motivation to make US the best place to live, too.

      I could have stayed in US, but I decided to move to Canada. I hope Americans that are concerned about inmigrants will feel better now. Since my education (PhD) was paid by the taxes of citizens of many countries including US, I wish the best to those people. I know Canadians feels better they got a new inmigrant with a lot of energy to build a better society.

    29. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      Are you claiming that the US is (immoraly?) poaching doctors from countries that need them, or that Socailist nations are failing to reward the obscene amount of work required to become a doctor and that their resulting mediocre health care system is their own fault?

      Economic might makes right? That'll be "immoral" then.
      The doctors don't seem to mind getting their education paid for by the states they abandon, do they?

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    30. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by TheBracket · · Score: 1
      Waiting lists are a problem in most free-at-the-point-of-use healthcare systems (Britain, France, Canada, etc.). It does suck to have to wait for medical care (although life threatening conditions are expedited sufficiently that the side effect of the wait is discomfort rather than death). On the other hand, it sucks a LOT less than being uninsured in the USA (my current status, after growing up in the UK). Even in the worst times for the National Health Service under Thatcher, healthcare worked well and was a million times more accessible than uninsured/poorly insured US care.

      Some examples from my own life, and those of my friends/relatives:

      • My granny needed a hip and knee replacement (in the UK). She had to wait two months, had the operation, a long hospital stay, and some really powerful medicine. Total amount paid to the NHS when the care was needed: 15 UKP.
      • I have a very rare medical condition that can lead to high fevers (sometimes requiring emergency medical intervention) for no obvious reason. Fortunately for me, it's effects have diminished with age. Throughout my childhood and college days, I would have to see a doctor regularly. I never waited more than two weeks for pediatric care in the UK, and it cost my parents nothing upfront. Conversely, while on the Student Death plan at SMSU a fever of 105F requiring an evening in an Urgent Care clinic cost me well over $800 (drugs included).
      • A friend of mine's mother over here had a heart attack. She was insured, but the healthcare provider found an excuse to drop her. The heart attack had complications, and she is now $50,000 in debt from it. An ex-girlfriend of mine's mother had a heart attack (albeit with fewer complications) back in England, and received similar care at no upfront cost whatsoever.

      You'll note I carefully say "upfront cost" in reference to UK charges. The NHS isn't free: you pay National Insurance on paycheques, effectively an NHS tax (it is free to under-18s, students, the elderly and the unemployed). Below 4800UKP/year, it's free. After that, you pay 11% of income falling between the 4800UKP/year and 32700UKP/year bands, and 1% above that. So for someone earning about 30k/year (UKP - that's around 58k/year USD) you're paying 2,520 UKP annually for insurance or about 210UKP/month. There are also some additional charges for prescription medicine.

      This compares rather favourably with my old Student Death insurance: $400/semester, a $500 deductible, and rules everywhere to ensure that they didn't have to pay for things. On student rates, my UK costs are: $0 for $0 deductible, full coverage, potentially crappy service. US rates for a painful (on student income) deductible, crappy service and not actually being able to claim half the time: $1,200/year.

      It compares quite well with a small-business plan we had last year. I was earning enough that in the UK I'd have been paying around 2,288 UKP/year for full coverage. I had to pay $120/month, my employer matched that. $2,880 IS less than 2,288UKP - but I had a large deductible again, couldn't see any doctor free for any reason, and had to pay the first chunk of any prescription costs. I wasn't even guaranteed coverage if the insurance company decided that it wasn't strictly necessary. The 'we cover everything' plan would have cost me a LOT more than the UK rates.

      So it's easy to bitch about national healthcare. I did, before I lived without it.

      --
      Lead developer, http://wisptools.net
    31. Re:Healthcare is great if you don't get sick by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you'd better slap up an Iron Curtain, then, to keep them in.

      --
      resigned
  12. Nice by smartin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As a Canadian living and working in the States, I wish the Canadian government would have done more to keep skilled citizens rather than attracting skilled immigrants. Unfortunately it is really just too easy to max out in the Canadian market place and the only option is to move south.

    --
    The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
    1. Re:Nice by PygmySurfer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That was my thoughts exactly upon reading the article. Why is it I had to come work in the US, rather than finding a job in my own country? I make more than twice as much in US dollars than I was making in Canadian dollars. Where's the incentive to stay?

    2. Re:Nice by edunbar93 · · Score: 1

      I hear people get mugged in the states. I've never even heard of that here.

      --
      "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
    3. Re:Nice by Inoshiro · · Score: 1

      Well, certainly less crime, less of a health care cost, and better quality of living would be the big ones.

      Plus, you know, not being part of a country which is very violent and aggressive.

      --
      --
      Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    4. Re:Nice by PygmySurfer · · Score: 1

      Right, because people don't get mugged in Toronto or Vancouver, or any other large Canadian cities.

  13. Quick question.... by Neuracnu+Coyote · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If American citizens are frustrated and annoyed with their government's behavior, can someone please explain how expatriating will do anything but make the problem worse?

    If they have any interest in achieving their goal, shouldn't they be sending a loud message to the rest of the world, inviting like-minded individuals to come live there instead? Or perhaps convince their neighbors to read a newspaper?

    Oh, wait. That would involve effort. Never mind - I forgot who I was talking about.

    --
    --
    1. Re:Quick question.... by xilmaril · · Score: 1

      expatriating solves their problem immidietly, though, instead of hoping that passing out fliers on a street corner to support voting or whatever will have an effect.

      the people who expatriate are doing it for their own good, not the good of america. want to see some true, patriotic, proud americans? go to a greenpeace rally.

      it's funny, what a reaction this kind of suggestion usually gets.

      I wonder what so many americans have against protestors anyway... I've met so many people who say the kind of thing you are, but bitch about 'damn hippies' all the time. (not accusing parent of any such thing)

    2. Re:Quick question.... by back_pages · · Score: 1
      If American citizens are frustrated and annoyed with their government's behavior, can someone please explain how expatriating will do anything but make the problem worse?

      See sig.

    3. Re:Quick question.... by stevey · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't worry about it. Over the years I've heard hundreds of Americans threaten to leave over govenment policies, or other issues.

      To the best of my knowlege none of them ever have, it certainly isn't the case that many people are leaving as a result of Mr. Bushs fine policies, just like they didn't when Clinton was doing crazy things. I'd love to see real figures of ex-pat numbers over the past few years, but I'm not sure where to find them.

      Whilst I can't really blame them (because I fully appreciate how hard it is to move city, let alone emmigrate) I'm cynical enough now not to expect the public to make any effort at all.

    4. Re:Quick question.... by ksheff · · Score: 1

      Depending on your views, it could also make things better.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    5. Re:Quick question.... by slavemowgli · · Score: 1

      Isn't the whole USA built on this - people emigrating from places they don't like to live in anymore?

      --
      quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    6. Re:Quick question.... by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      If American citizens are frustrated and annoyed with their government's behavior, can someone please explain how expatriating will do anything but make the problem worse?

      It's simple:
      The government's power is derived from the people.
      Less people => less taxes => less power

      The government gets a five-figure sum of money from me every year. By moving to a different country, I give that money to a different government.

      Think of it like changing ISPs or cellphone providers. :)

      Really, I don't think leaving this country is probably the best solution, but it seems a stretch to say it's counterproductive. Heck, it's how America got founded in the first place.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    7. Re:Quick question.... by miyako · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've long been considering moving out of the US for Canada or someplace in Europe. My thinking on the issue has generally been that a group of people has the right to generally run themselves the way they want. If I don't like it then, instead of trying to change things more to my liking (and to the chagrin of many others), I may be better served by moving to a location that is more inline with my own views.
      In my case, I would like to move to an area that is much more socially liberal than the US, and has more social services. Personally, I don't mind paying more in taxes if the government is going to use those taxes to help the people of the country.
      Basically, you say, "if you don't like X, why not try to change it, and invite other people to come and help", whereas I say "If most people in the area like X, but I don't, would I not be better served by going to a place where people share my ideas instead inviting fruther fragmentation into the area I am at, and trying to strong arm my own views onto others?"

      --
      Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
    8. Re:Quick question.... by killjoe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's more about not staying where you are not wanted. Bush sr said that atheists are not real americans and should be allowed to vote for example. The exact quote was " I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God."

      This is the president of the USA telling atheist citizens that they don't belong in the country. Other members of this administration have made similar remarks about atheists, collage professors, environmentalists, femminists, homosexuals and other people they hate.

      Why stay in a country that you are not wanted in? Why not move to a place where people don't hate you?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    9. Re:Quick question.... by heresyoftruth · · Score: 1

      They could just work in Canada on a work visa, keep their US citizenship, and vote via absentee ballots. That's my plan when I graduate.

      --
      Nothing hides evidence like a stew. -Gus Pratt
    10. Re:Quick question.... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      If American citizens are frustrated and annoyed with their government's behavior, can someone please explain how expatriating will do anything but make the problem worse?

      Well, it makes it 'not your problem' but the problem of those silly Americans. But if you really don't like your government, you'd move to a swing state.

    11. Re:Quick question.... by GooseKirk · · Score: 1

      OK, now you know of one. And I know a few more where I am. Although it's not entirely fair to say I bailed "because of Mr. Bush's policies." There's several interconnected feelings to it. Like, if the people of the US were actually that fucking retarded to elect that guy in 2004, then there's just no hope for the future of the US. Seems like every trend you care to examine just points downward, and thanks in large part to Dubya and the public response to him, I don't feel good about the country's prospects 10 or 20 or 30 years down the road. Or like, I felt that I lived in such a hypocritical, douchebaggy country, I actually feel better about myself when I'm not there. Or like, I never want to be aware of the existence of Fox News ever, ever again. The fact that I don't want my tax dollars going to support complete insanity is only part of it. You get the idea.

    12. Re:Quick question.... by Bobzibub · · Score: 1

      "The fact that I don't want my tax dollars going to support complete insanity is only part of it. You get the idea."
      As a Canuck living in the US, I have ethical issues with this too.
      Also, what should I say to those who "support the troops" when they do obviously bad things. (phosphorus on civilians et al).
      It is true that I am an alien in this land. There is a big divide between the right and the left. Not just politically, but culturally. Also a big divide between black and hispanic and white populations too. Different languages. Low tolerance.

      But all of that makes me apprecate the 'land of the Canuck' much more.

      Nice people though.

    13. Re:Quick question.... by GooseKirk · · Score: 1

      You could ask them just what the hell they mean by "support the troops." The "troops" get free health care, an M-16 and a license to kill - what the hell do they need from you? "Support the troops" is a completely nonsensical bullshit code-phrase which actually means, "if you don't love it when US soldiers go kill little brown people overseas, then you're some kind of terrorist."

      Or you could explain how you "support the troops" on an individual basis, in your own way. I can tell you firsthand that some troops are dicks. I fully support them in going to Iraq and getting their limbs blown off. I'm all for it. Send more. As long as you're sending the people who kinda just want to kill other people (cough Pat Tillman cough) off to kill other people who kinda just want to kill people, then you're killing all the right people and opening up better parking spaces for the rest of us [shamelessly ripped off from Doug Stanhope] On the other hand, most troops are decent people, so I support them in remaining in the US with their families, where they can go out for a beer and a hockey game without much chance of getting their limbs blown off.

      You could say these things, except anyone who actually uses the phrase "support the troops" is a piece of shit who isn't worth talking to anyway. Ignore them.

    14. Re:Quick question.... by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1
      If they have any interest in achieving their goal, shouldn't they be sending a loud message to the rest of the world, inviting like-minded individuals to come live there instead? Or perhaps convince their neighbors to read a newspaper?

      It happened to Oregon. It's why there's now more Californians in Oregon than Oregonians in Oregon. A couple Californians moved in, then invited all their cockroach like neighbors to move in and Valley it up a bit in every major city we have. Now many parts of larger metro areas are practical carbon copies of Los Angeles neighborhoods, right down to the same desert-sand paint jobs on *everything*.

      What you advocate destroys regional cultures. If you move, you do as the Romans do, you don't convince all your friends to make it just like the shithole you moved from and ruin it for the locals that so graciously haven't killed you for showing up.

      --
      Help us build a better map!
    15. Re:Quick question.... by TrekkieGod · · Score: 1
      If you're serious about moving out of the US, I recommend you do some extended research other than just finding a job and going there on a weekend for an interview / sightseeing. Since many jobs will help you find a place to live, sometimes it's incredible how little people know the place they're moving to. As someone who has lived both in and outside the US I can tell you that even though you and I may consider some of the social policies 'better,' there are plenty of little things that may be annoying to you, and you may or may not be willing to live with them as they accumulate. Save some money and try to arrange an extended vacation of a month or so at least in your country or choice.

      I don't know much about Canada to give you examples of that particular country, but some things I find extremely annoying about places I've been to outside the US (If you're wondering the exact nature of my experience, I've lived in Brazil as a child, been for some time in Italy when I was even younger, and have recently taken a short work trip to the UK where I was reminded of some of these annoyances. The example below are straight from what I remember from my week in the UK, some of which also apply to Brazil and Italy. I'm currently living in South Carolina).

      • No free refills of sodas at restaurants (keep the fat american jokes to yourselves)
      • Cities tend to completely close down extremely early (as early as 6-8pm, depending on the place). Even relatively big cities seem to suffer from this.
      • Gas prices. Gas is *cheap* in the US, I'm sure you've heard this. If you live someplace with a decent mass transportation network, it's not much better (I know it's much better for the environment). Subway and bus tickets add up when you need to use them everyday to get to work, even if you buy the package deals.

      There are plenty of other little things like that, but nothing else is immediately coming to mind at the moment. They're all individually pretty benign, and you'll certainly get used to a lot of things that are different, and perhaps even find the american way annoying as opposed to the new place, but like I said, you should do your research and find out exactly what those little things are.

      And, of course, the rant doesn't include the big things. A move to another country involves a lot of work, but responsible people remember to check the big things, and I assume you're doing your research and will be well prepared for that. What people forget are the little things, and then they transform into the whining American who keep telling their new friends how much better it was in the US when they didn't have to deal with these annoyances :)

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

    16. Re:Quick question.... by birge · · Score: 1

      Boy are you in for a shock. Yeah, go ahead. Go to Europe and see how much of your horrendous tax burden is spent on anything having to do with you. Unless you plan to join their welfare rolls...

    17. Re:Quick question.... by killjoe · · Score: 1

      LOL, still stalking me? Good for you, just make sure you have enough tissues to cum in OK?

      Oh and how are things in canada BWHAHAHAAHAHAAHHAHA. I am still cracking up about that one dude, that was some good shit.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    18. Re:Quick question.... by pavera · · Score: 1

      Well if they're moving to the continent that is just what they're hoping for (the wellfare). There isn't a growing economy left over there except for the UK. Why you would want to move to a place with 20-30% unemployment is beyond me... I love it when the left and the media in this country try to tell us we have it rough at 5%. (Oh wait, 7 years ago 6% was thought to be statistically fully employed... but now 5% is horrible and no one can find a job?) Anyway, Europe may be nice and liberal but there aren't any jobs, and there aren't many prospects either (as the whole continent is basically in a recession)

    19. Re:Quick question.... by Erik+Hollensbe · · Score: 1

      Oh, give me a break.

      I've been living in oregon for 27 years now, in Salem, Portland, Medford, and Ashland, and I have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

      I'll save the vitriol-laced rant for another time, but really, "metro areas"? Are you referring to the 50-60 blocks in Portland that 405 runs through? That's about it for the whole of the state... And it's very "old town". It really must have changed *drastically* since I was there last year. For some reason, I doubt that.

      If crappy roads, dated building techniques (it's called stucco), schools that have to scrap all extra-curricular programs so you can have a cheaper property tax, and a labor policy that makes Virginia seem corporate-unfriendly are your idea of "regional culture", by all means, go find a hippie commune in astoria and disconnect. Try to keep from voting, too, for those of us who like the weather but hate the back-asswards idea of "Progressive" in this state.

    20. Re:Quick question.... by Troed · · Score: 1

      You're welcome to have a look at the Nordic and Baltic countries then.

      http://annual.nib.int/reviews/reviews_2_7.html

    21. Re:Quick question.... by cyberbob2010 · · Score: 1

      don't worry dude, you've made an enemey out of a baby for life now

      He and his friends will stalk you forever, look - here
      and here

      --
      We seldom regret saying too little but often regret saying too much.
    22. Re:Quick question.... by cyberbob2010 · · Score: 1

      srry, meant here
      :)

      --
      We seldom regret saying too little but often regret saying too much.
    23. Re:Quick question.... by cberman · · Score: 1

      You do realize that in recent polls 80% of Americans support a National Healthcare initiative, over 50% generally support abortion rights and almost 70% percent believe we should be out of Iraq.... It's not necessarily the case that Americans are much too conservative for you, but the dicsonnect between the population and the ruling class has caused an enormous swing to the right becauase of the Republican's reliance on the grass roots organizing of the christian right.

    24. Re:Quick question.... by npsimons · · Score: 1

      If they have any interest in achieving their goal, shouldn't they be sending a loud message to the rest of the world, inviting like-minded individuals to come live there instead?

      Sometimes, after trying for a long enough time, you realize that even if it were worth the effort, it will never change anything anyway. This may sound defeatist, cynical or even clinically depressed (check, check and big check), but it's the truth. I mean, when is enough enough? I've tried. I've voted. I've written letters to my representatives. I've donated to worthy causes. I've even tried to have some enlightened conversations. It just isn't working, and the environment keeps getting more and more hostile. Many times I've considered emmigrating, especially to a secular/atheist country (if I can find one). The only reason I haven't is I have a wife who won't leave (that's another story). So, I'll keep trying because I have nothing better to do and because it's the right thing to do.

      Oh, wait. That would involve effort. Never mind - I forgot who I was talking about.

      Fuck you. Fuck you and your lousy generalizations. Try seeing beyond what your TV feeds you, you arrogant prick. What have you done to improve your community or country today?
    25. Re:Quick question.... by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1
      Bend has absorbed Madras as a suburb, making it a metropolis. Eugene did the same to Springfield. Salem to Kaiser. Portland to Beaverton, Vancouver, Gresham, West Linn, Oregon City, Tigard, Tualatin, Wood Village, and Troutdale.

      Try to keep from voting, too, for those of us who like the weather but hate the back-asswards idea of "Progressive" in this state.

      Go back to California or stop acting Californian. Take your pick.

      --
      Help us build a better map!
  14. It's a cop-out by sam_handelman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As an American I am in a better position to fix the problems than anyone. If I move to Canada (and even if I become a Canadian subject, or whatever) I have given up on influencing the course of events because I don't want to deal with some sort of guilt over my failure to do so recently?

    We don't know how much worse things might have been, either. We say, and it's true, that the domestic opposition didn't prevent the administration from invading Iraq. Well, that was a failure. There is literally no way of knowing what else they might have done if given free reign - Miers on the SCOTUS is only the start of it.

    In case you haven't been paying attention - the two last US elections have been very close, and their outcomes (especially in 2000) have had a tremendous impact on the rest of human history. In spite of those election results, public opinion here in the US still plays a big role in determining what the administration can and cannot get away with. If you're really concerned with human civilization, and not with melodrama, you move to a purple state, not to Canada.

    --
    The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
    1. Re:It's a cop-out by tomstdenis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      MOD UP.

      For once someone gets it. If we ever meet in person I'll buy you a beer [or whatever ya drink].

      As a Canadian [and fellow North Americaner] all I have to say is it's good to see someone gets it. Too many foreigners flee their country for safety reasons then just pursue the culture that bred it here [often with the problems just following behind them].

      Moving China to Toronto, Vancouver and a few other cities won't fix the problems they have in China.

      That said, if you guys don't open up the poles to a "third" option you're doomed for another four years of "Iraq SMASH! Iran PHEAR!". Demo == Repub.

      Oh and to CNN ... your system of government is NOT a democracy it's a republic and it's not bi-partisan no matter how much you say that word. Open up your fucking eyes and report the world the way it ACTUALLY is not the way you'd like it to be. For a 24 hour news station you'd have more to report [e.g. less repetition] if you actually investigated [and presented] the other parties. You know, your, "job" ...

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    2. Re:It's a cop-out by PaulBu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In case you haven't been paying attention - the two last US elections have been very close, and their outcomes (especially in 2000) have had a tremendous impact on the rest of human history

      Hmm, some people say that current US administration is arrogant in their attempt to change "human history", but it is really funny to see the same attitude from their opponents!

      Is it possible to have somewhat "balanced" (if not "fair") discussion here?

      Paul B.

    3. Re:It's a cop-out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      "In case you haven't been paying attention - the two last US elections have been very close, and their outcomes (especially in 2000) have had a tremendous impact on the rest of human history.

      You sound like a decent enough person but for god's sake put down the koolaid. Even the most cursory examination of recent history provides a dozen examples of coutries which have suffered far greater catastrophe and they too will leave as much impact as the fall of Pitcairn's society. The WTC towers didn't mean spit on a global scale, and your attacks on two Islamic nations will ultimately mean more to your history than the world's.

    4. Re:It's a cop-out by PygmySurfer · · Score: 1

      Heh.. have you ever caught Fox News? :)

    5. Re:It's a cop-out by aaronrp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a Canadian [and fellow North Americaner] all I have to say is it's good to see someone gets it. Too many foreigners flee their country for safety reasons then just pursue the culture that bred it here[...]

      Yes. It's good to find a Canadian who agrees that if the so-called Loyalists had stayed at home and tried to make their state better instead of fleeing to Canada, everybody would be better off.

      Of course, it's not too late. As the grandparent stated, more can be done from within the US than from outside. Surely twenty new US senators, and a corresponding shift in the House of Representatives, from north what is now the Canada-US border would make a tremendous difference. You seem to be one of those rare Canadians who recognizes this.

    6. Re:It's a cop-out by Sj0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The current negative savings rates in the US, propped up by incredible debt levels made worse by low interest rates and the housing bubble (allowing people who can't really afford it to have millions in cheap debt), could possibly spell the beginning of an economic holocaust the likes of which the US has never seen.

      Large scale societal dynamics are the things which shape history, not so much the politics of the day. Politics in a vacuum looks very impressive, but you look closer, and you'll often find that it is a mirror which reflects what's actually happening in the world.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    7. Re:It's a cop-out by GooseKirk · · Score: 1

      Bingo. Well said. I have some confidence that somehow, the US will avoid that fate... but the odds don't look especially appealing. And the societal dynamics are even more grim.

    8. Re:It's a cop-out by GooseKirk · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're right, it is a cop-out... and I do feel bad that I'm not there, fighting the good fight, trying to make things better.

      On the other hand, I feel better about myself, just not being there. I feel better that I never have to see Fox News ever again. I feel better knowing that even as Dubya spirals the country into the ground and half the people cheer as they go down, I don't have to ride along with them. Hell, I don't even have to pay attention.

      Sorry for the cop-out... but I know I'm much happier. Life's too short to tilt at windmills forever.

    9. Re:It's a cop-out by Erik+Hollensbe · · Score: 1

      I find it very interesting that a large population of the world views US as "world police" in a negative light, but if americans want to move to a country which doesn't have government that's like that, suddenly it's their problem, too.

      Here's my proposal:

      If you care about what the US is doing so much, move YOUR ass here, get your citizenship, and vote. :)

    10. Re:It's a cop-out by Redwin · · Score: 1

      If you're really concerned with human civilization, and not with melodrama, you move to a purple state, not to Canada.

      And that, to my mind sums up the problem with the US. Moving to another country and still being affected by the country you left is definitely not a good state of affairs. I wonder what would happen if a sudden mass of people decided that they didn't like the way things were run and instead of either grumbling about it or trying to change it locally, just went "Fine, I'm leaving" and moved to places like Canada or Europe. Maybe that would have a greater effect than fighting over states that are not as decided as others.

      --
      Warning, comments may not have been passed by the sanity department of my brain.
  15. Well it's the UK, but same logic... by hug_the_penguin · · Score: 1

    Well i'm not in the US, i'm in the UK, although the same logic applies... That said, we haven't exactly done a grand job of keeping anyone out anyway...

    --
    ~HTP~ Hug that tux ;)
    1. Re:Well it's the UK, but same logic... by ThaFooz · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well i'm not in the US, i'm in the UK...That said, we haven't exactly done a grand job of keeping anyone out anyway...

      More precisley, you haven't exactly figured out who to keep in. I guess the Americans and Australians weren't the rejects that you suspected they were ;)

    2. Re:Well it's the UK, but same logic... by hug_the_penguin · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Let's not get xeonphobic about this ;)

      We're doing fine at keeping skilled doctors etc. in, working the NHS etc., the problem is the non-workers. I was waiting at a bus stand a few months back and i started talking to this guy there. He told me he was a South African and that he was only here to get his family transported over so his son could have an operation free on the NHS. I don't exactly call that a good reason to be over here, given that the goverment are already EXTREMELY generous to immigrants, what with giving them a house and car for free, more than pensioners or disabled people get.

      --
      ~HTP~ Hug that tux ;)
    3. Re:Well it's the UK, but same logic... by jZnat · · Score: 1

      That said, we haven't exactly done a grand job of keeping anyone out anyway...

      What are you talking about? I can tell just by their smile that they belong in the UK!

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    4. Re:Well it's the UK, but same logic... by leathered · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, immigration of Australians is essential if the beer is to be kept flowing in the London's bars.

      As for Americans, we need them here because...

      I'll get back to you on that one.

      --
      For all intensive porpoises your a bunch of rediculous loosers
    5. Re:Well it's the UK, but same logic... by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      Yeah cause saving his son's life isn't a good reason for him to be there or anything....

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    6. Re:Well it's the UK, but same logic... by ThaFooz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ah yes, I forgot the slashdot rules. A Brit with a gentle poke at Americans is all in good fun, but an American doing it is xeonphobic ;)

      In all seriousness though, I agree with you that the American and British laws and/or their enforcement tend to be favorable to immigrants and are prone to abuse. It doesn't particularly bother me though, I'd certainly rather that then the inverse elitist anti-immigrant mentality (anyone heard of the hoops one has to jump through to earn Swiss or Japanese citizenship?). I'm not sure if say that because of the old American give-us-your-wretched mentality, or because the population density of the US still allows it, or because the US economy benifits from it (IMHO anyways, I'm sure someone would argue it).

      This is kind of an aside, but I've kind of always wondered this about the English. You're example an abuse of NHS was that of a South African man... but do you feel any obligation towards South Africa? I mean, the British rape of India & Sub-Saharan Africa only ended ~60 years ago, and has yet to recover. Not that the US (or any other nation) doesn't have skeletons in its closet, of course - but do you think such relativley recent disadvantages should factor into said immigration laws, college admissions, job applications, tax breaks, et cetra? The US has decided "yes" (hotly debated though), and I was wondering the take on it over in the UK.

    7. Re:Well it's the UK, but same logic... by 16K+Ram+Pack · · Score: 1
      As a Brit, I'll take issue with some of that.

      South Africa was lost to the British nearly 100 years ago, when it was taken over by the Boers (independence in 1907).

      Since giving up most territories, the UK has worked hard with nations through bodies like the Commonwealth, and has given a huge amount of money to the development of nations.

      I'm not saying that some terrible things weren't done under the empire (along with some good things), but there's a time when everyone has to look after themselves, and stop blaming the past.

    8. Re:Well it's the UK, but same logic... by ThaFooz · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the correction on South Africa. Though I don't think I'm incorrect in believing that the British colonial era only ended in the 1940's.

      My comments weren't meant as an insult or anything. I totally agree that "there's a time when everyone has to look after themselves, and stop blaming the past" - but when Europeans are such harsh critics of US policy, past and present, I do wonder what they feel like their own level of responsibility is/should be & where the line is between 'moral obligation' and 'history'. Just like I wonder what level of resposibility the US owes to relativley recent blunders (Cold War involvment in South America and Southeast Asia and Civil rights issues, etc).

    9. Re:Well it's the UK, but same logic... by Tau+Zero · · Score: 1

      It's certainly not a good reason for the British to let him in. One more freeloader on an already-taxed NHS? And people wonder why the BNP is getting traction.

      --
      Time is Nature's way of keeping everything from happening at once... the bitch.
  16. Funny this should pop up on slashdot... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just as I am researching what it takes to immigrate to Canada, job opportunities, quality of life, housing prices, etc.

    I come from Europe and, no offense to our American friends, find Canada a much more appealing choice than the USA - exactly because I perceive Canada and Canadian mentality to be much closer to a European mindset.

    I admit this may just be a whim, but coming from a country where everybody under 40 years of age is suffering from financial rape from the older generation, Canada sure does look appealing.

    1. Re:Funny this should pop up on slashdot... by Neoprofin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't worry, many Americans hate France too.

  17. Canada's more like the US than ever by p3d0 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nowadays a guy can go a whole day in Toronto without ever seeing a single igloo.

    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    1. Re:Canada's more like the US than ever by udowish · · Score: 1

      I think u mean the US is more like Canada, at least they try. Isn't that cute!

      --
      when in doubt press enter and we'll figure it out later..
  18. Prepostorous! by nxtr · · Score: 5, Funny

    >>Canada Moves to Keep Skilled Workers

    No one can move an entire country, not even Superman!

    1. Re:Prepostorous! by Tapi · · Score: 1

      But he can turn back time by reversing the rotation of the earth!

      --
      Watch the watchers
    2. Re:Prepostorous! by Akaihiryuu · · Score: 1

      Actually...the way I interpreted that...he didn't actually reverse the rotation of the planet. What he did, by going so fast, was to make himself go back in time, thus from his perspective, it looked like the planet was rotating the other way. Thus...nothing actually happened to the planet, Superman himself just went back in time. That sure makes more sense. Reversing the rotation of the planet that suddenly would just destroy it, not reverse time.

    3. Re:Prepostorous! by Tapi · · Score: 1

      I was going to chalk it up to movie physics, but your interpretation does appear to make more sense

      --
      Watch the watchers
    4. Re:Prepostorous! by khallow · · Score: 1

      Incorrect, Superman has been known to move the Moon at times. The Moon is larger than any country.

  19. Flights leave hourly, and the borders are open by PenguinBoyDave · · Score: 1

    Feel free to leave this "hellhole." Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

    --
    I'm not a troll, but I play one on Slashdot.
  20. Look at who this applies to... by KJE · · Score: 2, Informative
    From TFA:
    "Ottawa will spend $700 million over the coming years in a two-pronged initiative to make it easier for skilled immigrants to stay in the country while at the same tackling a big backlog of people waiting to get into Canada."

    Also:
    "Immigration Minister Joe Volpe will join the flurry of pre-election promises with his announcement today."

    The minority government in Canada is about to fall, this is just one of the many, many promises the Liberal Party is making before they lose a no confidence vote next week, think of all these spending promises as the beginning of their campaign and react accordingly.

  21. Goodbye Canada by Zutroi_Zatatakowsky · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I'm a Canadian (Quebecois actually) and plan on moving to France in a couple of months. So long, square heads! No government subsidies will keep me here!

    --
    All Hail Discordia. Hail Eris. Fnord.
    1. Re:Goodbye Canada by ksheff · · Score: 1

      Every Canadian I've ever met has hated the Frenchies. Are they that damn annoying?

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    2. Re:Goodbye Canada by Darktan · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Annoying? It's not really the Quebecois that are annoying, it's the ones who use the threat of separation as a stick to bully the rest of Canada. Oh no! you didn't concede to our every whim! We're leaving! It's like dealing with a three year old.

      That said, most of the Quebecois that make it out west are really cool. They're almost as much fun to hang around as the Newfies.

    3. Re:Goodbye Canada by tomstdenis · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      They bitch and whine that their culture is not being respected, all while they themselves dillute it with American culture.

      For example, signs in Quebecastan must be in French first then English and the English must be smaller. That's not just "a good idea" it's the fucking law. They'll go around measuring your sign to ensure compliance.

      Then you have, the separatists. Those confused folk think Quebec belongs to the province. It's Canadian soil. So if they separate they have to still pay taxes to Canada.

      For the most part the vocal "Quebecois" bitch about how hard their life is then they proceed to NOT learn English to NOT repsect other peoples cultures and to ASSUME their superiority by forcing others out of the province.

      You wouldn't believe how much money goes into the province in the form of transfers and government programs. Then you have the civil servants who are mostly French. Good luck if you're English. You must be "bilingual" by which they mean French only. If you go into an office downtown you're lucky if the person at the counter can speak English to any productive level. Some of the popular offices like Health Canada are ok but things like the passport office or the courthouse are French.

      Then you have the CCRA and other Human Resources like folk. All French.

      CSE? All French.

      Military? French.

      Federal government? French.

      etc...

      While the rest of us are sitting here going "wtf did I do to them?" I'm glad I work private sector [for an American company no less]. I just ignore the government so long as my quality of life is ok since it seems no matter how much I vote for the "not french people" we keep getting the fucking French Liberal party in office...

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    4. Re:Goodbye Canada by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Maudit hestie.

      Go back to hell from whence thoust came.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    5. Re:Goodbye Canada by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      You fucking goddammed bloke. Despite living in the second largest french city in the world, I still have to speak a foreign language to work, just because you stupid dumb fucks are too fucking stupid to learn another language.

    6. Re:Goodbye Canada by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
      I'm a Canadian (Quebecois actually) and plan on moving to France in a couple of months. So long, square heads! No government subsidies will keep me here!
      C'est quoi ta plogue Manuel? Moi aussi ch'técoeuré de c't'hostie de place de cul...
    7. Re:Goodbye Canada by tomstdenis · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I speak French [not fluently but enough to get by]. I took it in school as an immersion student. I lost interest when I realized that it's not worth it [comp.sci doesn't require it].

      And besides that, Canada is bilingual not French. Why should French only speaking citizens get jobs with the government when they can get out a couple English words while the Anglophones have to speak French fluently to pass as "bilingual".

      Why should I as an anglophone business owner have to display French signs on my business in Quebec? What if I don't speak a word of French at all?

      ***That's*** why the English are pissed off. Not because the government is bilingual but that the government FAVOURS the french over the english.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    8. Re:Goodbye Canada by udowish · · Score: 1

      Thank god, the sooner all you white flag, whining babies leave the better

      --
      when in doubt press enter and we'll figure it out later..
    9. Re:Goodbye Canada by nierdal · · Score: 1

      On dirait vraiment qu'aucun informaticien n'est fier d'être Québécois?

      _____________________________________

      For you information, Québec is not part of the Canadian constitution, has a result of the Lac Meech failure. So yes theorically, he's a Quebecois, not a Canadian. Heck, since the 60's everybody in Canada call us Quebecer and not French Canadians.

      I'm a proud Quebecer, a soverenist, and... surprisely enough... I'm politically at right... Why?

      First because for those who know the Canadian politics, they know that the federal government is TOO much centralised, and has too much cash for what it has to do. The Liberal party is a disguised monarchy.

      Secondly because I think that if Quebec was a country, there would be no need for law 101 (the law that makes French bigger on every signs). Why? Because has a country French would be the official language, and it would be much easier to protect our language that way. Oh and maybe less people would be afraid of making EVERY Quebecer learn perfect English at school.

      And for the guy that want to move to France, this is the most stupidest idea EVER! You what to move to a country that has less jobs, and more taxes? I could at last understand the USA... or Switzerland... but France???? IMO your far better in Quebec than in France.

    10. Re:Goodbye Canada by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      They bitch and whine that their culture is not being respected

      Lets see how much you respect their culture:

      Quebecastan [...] fucking law [...] Then you have, the separatists. Those confused folk [...] the vocal "Quebecois" bitch [...] I just ignore the government [...] no matter how much I vote for the "not french people" we keep getting the fucking French

      Results? Not. At. All.

      So, huge biggot, I say to you: Ferme ta criss de yeule, mon ostie de mangeux de marde.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    11. Re:Goodbye Canada by The+Hobo · · Score: 1

      Criss est un anglicisme, tu veux dire crisse ;-)

      Quelque chose pour toi: ici

      --The Hobo, un Franco-Ontarien

      --
      There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
    12. Re:Goodbye Canada by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      You're clearly just trying to fuel some sort of flamewar. If you really think what you are saying is "true" you really ought to spend a month or two in another city and see how "superior" you really are.

      But I jest, you are just just trying to flame for the sake of starting a flamewar.

      So I give in, you're clearly less mature than I am. In the "who's the biggest kid" contest you win. I salute you.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    13. Re:Goodbye Canada by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      "Ferme ta criss de yeule,"

      French: Close your beak [guelle] or mouth/snout [yeule]. Seems complicated, infers class system, etc, etc.

      English: Go die in a car fire. Infers I want you to die the most horible way possible.

      Which is more to the point? :-)

      And they say French is superior....

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    14. Re:Goodbye Canada by TrevorB · · Score: 1

      ...it seems no matter how much I vote for the "not french people" we keep getting the fucking French Liberal party in office...

      Hmm, perhaps these two things are connected? :)

      The Conservatives don't have a chance of forming a majority government until they take on a leader from Quebec. That may sound crazy, but I stand by it. Western alienation can only take you so far. The majority party has to be the party of all of Canada, with strong showings in BOTH Ontario and Quebec. End of story. There's just not enough seats to form a government otherwise.

    15. Re:Goodbye Canada by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      "Ferme ta criss de yeule," French: Close your beak

      STFU, actually.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    16. Re:Goodbye Canada by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      I lived in Downtown Ottawa for more than a year. But thank-god I'm back in Montréal. Even with the Internet, Babylon-on-the-Rideau is awfully boring. And you, have you ever crossed the river into Québec for 5 minutes?

    17. Re:Goodbye Canada by Carpe+PM · · Score: 1

      In other words, 'Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries!'

    18. Re:Goodbye Canada by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      I used to spend my summers on the CFB with the air cadets. Where I had other cadets mock and insult me for being English. Where the "biligual" flight sections were French only [which was ok because I do speak enough French] and you'd be lucky if an official [e.g. officer or instructor] spoke English at all. Yes, I've spent time in Quebec.

      Only a moron believes in a superior culture in a country like Canada. We're a mixed bag of cultures. What? You think McDonalds is French? How about that MTV [which is adored in France btw]? Seen any movies lately? Played any video games? Do you use a computer?

      A moron thinks their way of life is superior while indulging themselves in the product of many different cultures. I don't dislike the French. I dislike the vocal Quebecois who are trying to ruin Canada because they can't play nice. They amount to no more than a bunch of squabling idiots who have nothing productive to do with their lives so they harass and fight with others.

      As for Montreal ... pave your damn roads already :-)

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    19. Re:Goodbye Canada by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      In any other country on the face of the earth, Seperatists would be hanged as traitors. Here, we're just fed up with listening to their bitching.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    20. Re:Goodbye Canada by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Da french are superior, tabarnac!

      We can't pronounce 'th', but we are superior!

      (Yeah, I live in Winnipeg. I haven't learned french for the same reason you haven't learned Russian.)

      --
      It's been a long time.
    21. Re:Goodbye Canada by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      No, actually that's not what it means.

      It's usually said as "ferme ta gueule" which is more insulting.

      It means you're a lower class person, that you're an animal and you should shut your opening because I don't want to hear the noise that escapes your face. It implies a level of hatred and malice far beyond "STFU".

      But you'd know that if you weren't some ignorant asshat trying to show off your vast superior habitant slang knowledge.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    22. Re:Goodbye Canada by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      The problem though as with any democracy is that people only vote for the people they're socially pressured to like.

      Last election I actually went to the four major parties HQs in my riding. I sat down and talked with them. I found out their selling points and made a conscience decision to vote for the party I chose.

      How many [by percentage] do you think of the votes casted were from people who did the same thing? Maybe 1% probably 2% at most.

      The rest are from people who do one the following

      1. I voted for X last time and X this time [most likely]
      2. My family supports X so I voted X [also likely]
      3. I think their policies [based on advertisements] are worthy
      4. I voted for X because I dislike the policies of Y [based on advertisements]
      5. I voted for random because it doesn't matter

      That isn't democracy that's a popularity contest. And of course, garbage in produces garbage out.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    23. Re:Goodbye Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Oh I know more about the Meech Lake accord than you think.
      It was nothing more than pandering to the whiney seperatists.

      Let's see what amendments it would have made to the Canada act:
      1. Recognition of a "distinct society"
      2. Commitment to Bilingualism
      3. Increased provincial powers with immigration
      4. Provincial right to constitutional veto
      5. Provincial influence in appointments to supreme court and senators

      Number 1 is selfish (see below). 2 is already entrenched in Canada. 3 I don't really care about. 4 is debatable as to suitability. 5 is something more than Quebec has wanted for quite some time.

      The Meech Lake accord was _APPROVED_ by everyone but Manitoba and Newfoundland. And thank goodness for that.
      Unfortunately, by the BNA act (1867), Quebec belongs to Canada. Quebec just has issues with the repatriated constitution.

      Why not mention the failed Charlottetown accord in your diatribe? All I know is that it's a good thing that all this nonsense stopped in 1992. Quebec belongs to Confederation. Quebec is not a nation -- it's a province.

      I like Quebec. I've spent a lot of time there. I'm reasonably fluent in french. I've lived in every region, and travelled to almost every corner of this land. Quebec is no more distinct, than say, Newfoundland, or Alberta, or the NWT. Every region is different and valuable. The exclusionary seperatists don't seem to realize this.

      I'm not racist, I'm angry. A seperatist can be "Quebecois", black, asian, anglo, it doesn't matter. The residents of Quebec are not a race, and thankfully most don't agree with the seperatists.

      So, get off your ass, go out and see Canada. Learn about each region and what makes it unique. See that dealing with the rest of the country with civility will earn you far more than trying to force an issue that's been done to death and proven asinine.

    24. Re:Goodbye Canada by nierdal · · Score: 1

      Ok first most Quebecer are separatist, last polls says 54%, and this proportion is much larger among french Quebecer. Secondo, you seem to think that I dont understand what is the Lac Meech. The fact that the constitution was not rappatriatedwith the failure of the Lac Meech mean that the Quebec is not officially in Canada, whatever you say. Yes theorically we are from the 1867 BNA act , but officially we are not completely in Canada. Like Wikipedia says : "It was designed to induce Quebec to accept the Canada Act." And "The Canada Act 1982 is an Act of Parliament passed by the British Parliament that severed virtually all remaining constitutional and legislative ties between the United Kingdom and Canada. " And for your information my dear friend, I've lived 1 month in USA, 1 months in Vancouver and 3 months in Europe, with is IMO a good way of having a good vision of my province. And considering my age (21) that's very good. I like the rest of Canada, and the USA, but I cannot tolerate people like you who think they can dictate a nation what they must do. If you want to understand the vision of Quebecer, learn a bit of french and listen videos of René Lévesque. I'm proud of my nation and I think that has a country it would be much easier to protect our identity. But that do not mean in any way that I want to be closed on the rest of the world. That could be done in peace with all other countries, including the rest of Canada. Vive le Québec libre my dear friend!

    25. Re:Goodbye Canada by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1
      I used to spend my summers on the CFB with the air cadets. Where I had other cadets mock and insult me for being English.
      Beats the shit for being beaten because you're the lone french on the block because you grow-up in the english ghetto of Montréal...
      Where the "biligual" flight sections were French only [which was ok because I do speak enough French] and you'd be lucky if an official [e.g. officer or instructor] spoke English at all. Yes, I've spent time in Quebec.
      That's nothing like the superior officer courses given at Kingston in english only (because Chretien closed St-Jean for insure that Québec shall not have any military academy). If you don't "speak white" in the armed forces, you'll be sweeping the mess hall all your life when not used as cannon fodder.
      Only a moron believes in a superior culture in a country like Canada. We're a mixed bag of cultures.
      Like hell we are. The english in their little corner baking their little soup in their splendid isolation, and the french looking elsewhere in the world to find what Canada cannot give it. Why do you think we want our sovereignty? Because Canada doesn't deliver.
      What? You think McDonalds is French?
      McDonald's is far from being superior!!!
      How about that MTV [which is adored in France btw]?
      Ouate de phoque???
      Seen any movies lately?
      Yes, a very good french movie: Ridicule.
      Played any video games?
      Heaven forbid!
      Do you use a computer?
      Actually, no. I post this through the smoke-signal-to-http gateway in Métabetchouan. It's very cheap, only three wampum belts per megapuff.
      A moron thinks their way of life is superior while indulging themselves in the product of many different cultures.
      How can you KNOW you're superior if you haven't see the other cultures to compare you against?
      I don't dislike the French. I dislike the vocal Quebecois who are trying to ruin Canada because they can't play nice.
      Well, duh? if one doesn't play nice with you, you should love them nevertheless?

      Helloooo????

      Canada doesn't deliver, period. We don't have half as good a life as elsewhere in Canada. If Canada is so good, why the fuck do we consistently have more unemployment in Québec than in Ontario, no matter if we have a pederalist or sovereignist government in place???

      They amount to no more than a bunch of squabling idiots who have nothing productive to do with their lives so they harass and fight with others.
      History has taught us that the english will not give anything unless you put a knife to their throats.

      In the 1960's we had to start bombing mailboxes and federal buildings so our 200-year old concerns had to be considered. Until then, the english didn't do anything ecxept fatten themselves on our backs.

    26. Re:Goodbye Canada by nierdal · · Score: 1

      1 - So seem to be more mature with your comments. But facts are, your first comment was not very kind with people who think different than you.

      2 - For a 21 years old, 5 months of travel is not that bad.

      3 - Quebec is a distinct society : we speak french... we are not in the sense of the the law, but we are.

      4- Unity is all about been a soverenist.

      5- Stop posting anonymous, be pround of what you think.

      You've got the seem speech that make Alliance Quebec what it is. You want to keep Quebec unite with Canada even if you perfectly know that a majority of Quebecer don't because they don't trust you anymore. And you will try by all means, even barely legal, to keep us, like the Liberal Party did.

      Don't play the game of saying that you'r older, and that by that way, you know more about Quebec. The fact that you don't know that most Quebecer are soverenist prove that you are a bit outdated, or that your don't want to admit reallity.

      In fact I will be honest with you : It is true that I don't know that much about the rest of the Canada history. But I know dam well the Quebec history, relationship with Canada AND the confederation.

      It would be very difficult for you to prove your maturity to me since your first post contained so much hate about sovereignist Quebecer. I understand Quebecer who don't want sovereignty, and I don't insult them for that. That's all about been wise.

    27. Re:Goodbye Canada by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      I mean it: Shut the fuck up, troll.

      some ignorant asshat trying to show off your vast superior habitant slang knowledge.

      Hmmm, that would be you, the pedant tryiing to argue that what I said, in my fucking native language, you inbred moron, didn't mean what I meant it to mean. Off course, being a troll, you don't shut up.

      So, fuck off and die, looser, you flamebaited and got flamed, you must be SO proud! Finally an achievement within your reach!

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    28. Re:Goodbye Canada by Zutroi_Zatatakowsky · · Score: 1

      Merci, merci, quelqu'un devait lui dire. ;-)

      --
      All Hail Discordia. Hail Eris. Fnord.
    29. Re:Goodbye Canada by hr+raattgift · · Score: 1

      Why should I as an anglophone business owner have to display French signs on my business in Quebec? What if I don't speak a word of French at all?

      I don't agree with the "victim" mentality so common among the péquistes, however it might help to remember that there certainly was much worse in the years before la revolution tranquille of the late 60s and early 70s.

      In the early 60s and before, in any sizable company in Montreal and Quebec City, and in any white-collar position at all, the working language was almost inevitably expected to be English. It wasn't just that an office full of francophones would be expected to accomodate a single anglophone when speaking with him (hey, not many "hers" in these situations back then), or in meetings where the anglophone was present, but even when discussing things amongst themselves. A watercooler discussion in French was grounds for termination -- you could get fired for speaking your own language together.

      In large department stores in Montreal and Quebec City, you'd see English-only signs. Staff were taught to greet people in English, and to use English preferentially with customers who could speak either language. As in the case in many offices, no personal discussions in French would be allowed, or you'd be fired.

      There was real oppression in the workplace -- it wasn't just a case of possible bias like thinking that maybe a francophone might be a little more bilingual than an anglophone and thus more suitable for a government job if all other qualifications were equal, it was: Speak English Or You're Fired.

      "Maîtres chez nous" -- masters in our own home -- was one of the reactions to the social changes of the 60s. Many people took the view that the workplace language rules were not only oppressive, but they effectively enslaved francophone Quebecers, often at the hands of business owners and managers with no personal connection to Quebec beyond responsibility for the office, plant, branch, or facility in the province. Practically everyone who saw the situation as unfair wanted either to end the unfairness, or to outright turn the tables on the oppressors.

      Camille Laurin ended up in the second group -- the revolutionaries -- and he ended up being the guiding force behind what in English is called Bill 101, which established French as the sole official language in Quebec.

      Another group ended up supporting the recommendations of the Laurendeau-Dunton report (Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism), many of which were championed by Pierre Trudeau, who introduced the Official Languages Act in 1969, and continued work in federal politics to place French on an equal footing with English, and to prevent discrimination against the francophone majority in Quebec, the anglophone minority in Quebec, and the francophone minorities in other parts of Canada.

      René Lévesque wound up in the middle. He felt that legislating the status of French was a display of weakness, and a humiliating admission of the continuing colonial status of Quebec propped up by francophone Quebecers' lack of self confidence. However, he also agreed that Bill 101 was necessary anyway, and assiduously defended the law as long as he lived.

      The most visible results include packaging labelled in both languages (only since 1974 for food), mutual complaints about government activity favouring people whose first language is the other language, and in Quebec ongoing battles among the inheritors of Laurin's "French Only", a milder "French First" that was closely associated with Robert Bourassa, and a "French and English Equally First, the rest maybe where possible" among the inheritors of the Laurendeau-Dunton official bilingualism.

      The middle group has held primacy in Quebec language politics since the 1980s, and thus you find yourself in a situation where (in Quebec) you have to put up signs in French, and you have to allow your employees and customers to communicate to

    30. Re:Goodbye Canada by nierdal · · Score: 1



      1. Yes but when you act like in your first post you lose all my respect. To debate with someone, even on slashdot, respect is a prerequist.

      2. Sure, I sincerely wish it could be more, but currently i'm at university so it's not easy to travel often.

      3. That's the main difference between english Canadian and Quebecer. They dont see why language could define a society. Values that come from our language, from our culture, perfectly define our society. You've lived in Quebec, you know that the Quebecer think different then the rest of Canadians. We are a special phenomenon, because historically there should be no Quebec, and because of a lots of events we've been able to survive and not been assimilated.

      4. I'm united with the rest of my fellow Quebecer. This is unity in my sense. You can disagree with this but for me it is unity. And if Quebec was a country, I would be united with Canada, but I would be the owner of my land.

      5. Your Slashdot account is a representation of your behavior. If you act like a troll, by trying to provoke people, you'll be marked has a troll. That make you a bit reputable to your acts.

      5. Again, I could say the same. You know that 4 generations ago, you called us white n*gger? That you payed us slave wage? Since the faillure of france to protect Quebec, you've always tryed to assimilate us by all means, politics, economics... but with the help of history, and honestly a lot of luck, we've been able to survice. Face the fact : every culture want to assimilated the minorities. A majority of english canadians would be happier if everybody in Quebec was speaking english. You're so afraid of seeing us going away, because that would be hard on your pride.

      And concerning the fact that we are far more powerful together than apart, you know that in the current situation Canada is strongly divided between is provinces. The only true canadian province is Ontario. And Ontario want to impose is vision to the rest of Canada. If the Canada would leave is province do their own things without too much interference, it is sure that we would be far more stronger. Because in the current situation , nobody is satisfacted, except Ontario.

    31. Re:Goodbye Canada by nierdal · · Score: 1

      3. I perfertly know that, this is why I say that we had luck. Owever one of the things you need to put in your balance is the fact that the british could have chosen to assimilate us, but they were too afraid of us going with the US.

      4. Yes but you don't play your reputation.

      5. You want to use my speech to prove that I believe in fairy tale, which IMO is what you believe when you think that Canada is united. But that was previsible because it is still hard to understand for a lot of english canadian how badly they've treatened us 2 generations ago. This is not fary tales, this is reality "regardless of what you think". Quebecer are no more heroic than any other nation, they are just lucky. That I perfectly know. But we've defended this luck. This was not easy. Assimilation of french is a matter of 3 generations. If it was not of the law 101, there would be a decline of french speaker in Quebec after the 70's.

      I strongly believe that a language give the people I different way of thinking. I don't mean by this that Quebecer are completly different than the rest of Canadians, we are all in the same pool for our thinking (Quebecer, english Canadian, north american states (everything except Jesusland ;) ).

    32. Re:Goodbye Canada by nierdal · · Score: 1

      There was a strong division in WWII, Quebecer doesn't wanted to go to war, has opposed to english. We were seen as coward. But the reality is that there was a strong regilious propaganda that prevented the Quebecer to truly understand the goals of the war.

      I'm of the same opinion of you about survival of french as I already stated. It is because of the catholic church , and is alliance with Duplessis, that the french survived. But the french like you said IS a particular facet of a community. It is our main distinction, and the main thing on what all our values are attached.

      But I want to cite you a bit : "The real threat to traditional cultures across Canada is the homogenization trend caused by consumerism and american media. I resent this and its attack on my own family's traditions, and see it destroying our way of life as well. "

      Americanisation is to english what english is to Quebecer. Without great political vision, it is impossible to stop it because the main thing that drive our society is consommation, not culture. People dont care about culture, so they tend to be easily assimilated when you offer them goods that seem to make them happy. In Québec, without laws and protectionism, everybody would speak english because french (and culture) are not usefull things in an english country. But within a french country, when french is the official language, it is much more easier to protect the language and ask business to comply with it.

      Like a lot of my fellow Quebecer, if the government was much more decentralisated it would be much more easier to accept Canada. But in the current situation, the federal government will never cut in is powers because he has too much cash. They will continue to interfere in the politics of the provinces, making things worst. Almost everybody in Quebec is disillusioned of Ottawa, and they think that that the only thing that could change the situation is sovereignty.

    33. Re:Goodbye Canada by ksheff · · Score: 1

      Then let them leave.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
  22. As an american currently living in canada... by Vexorg_q · · Score: 1

    I would argue that the united states has a much better healthcare system, based on my experiences so far with canadian facilities.

    Tim Hortons though, its fantastic.

    --

    Idle hands are the devil's workshop, but idle minds are much worse
    1. Re:As an american currently living in canada... by ThaFooz · · Score: 1

      Tim Hortons though, its fantastic.

      The donuts taste like they're made out of plastic, and the coffee somehow manages to taste morke like ash than Starbucks. But if thats your thing, you don't need to go to Canada for it. They're everywhere around here (here being Southern New England).

    2. Re:As an american currently living in canada... by Vexorg_q · · Score: 1

      I've heard they're down in the US now. Being from New Hampshire, we didnt have any, so that was kind of a disappointment.

      However, I think the thing that makes canada unique is the ratio of people to tim hortons, Canada has the US beat there no question.

      --

      Idle hands are the devil's workshop, but idle minds are much worse
    3. Re:As an american currently living in canada... by Shelled · · Score: 1

      Culinary insults from the land of boiled beef!?!?! What did we do to warrant that? ;)

    4. Re:As an american currently living in canada... by znu · · Score: 1

      The Canadian system is structurally better; it spends a larger fraction of every dollar on actual health care. The US spends something like twice as much per capita, though, so it generally comes out ahead on quality. Unless you're one of the 45 million people who isn't covered, of course.

      --
      This space unintentionally left unblank.
    5. Re:As an american currently living in canada... by ThaFooz · · Score: 1

      I haven't heard of boiled beef. I thought New England was home of Clam Chowder, Lobster, and Dunkin Donuts. But I suppose you're right... I'm not really from a region that can rag on anyone's cooking (well, except for the British and the Texans, of course ;)

    6. Re:As an american currently living in canada... by CrankyBuffalo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Also as an American currently living in Canada, I must disagree. Canadian healthcare is FAR superior.

      Canadian healthcare does the job -- everyone has a basic level of care. For specialized services that are not life threatening, you wait. In the US, if you are fortunate enough to have good insurance, you can fight your way through the system and get care...once. After that, you're hosed unless you manage to keep insurance through your work, because you'll never get insurance personally again.

      My wife waited 3 months for a gynecological procedure in Bellingham, WA before we moved. She's been waiting for 5 months or more here in Vancouver for a possible knee procedure.

      Emergency medicine is exactly the same here except that you don't get a multithousand dollar bill at the end of the experience.

      Our last complete year in the US, we paid over $14,000 US for medical insurance. In BC, we pay about $1300 CDN. The $5K CDN or so in extra taxes we paid saved us a bunch of money.

      And BTW, only 2% or so of Canadians ever avail themselves of US healthcare, despite claims that Canadians flock to the US to get care they can't get on time in Canada. Just ain't so.

  23. You may still have to wait in the U.S. by SideshowBob · · Score: 1

    ...and that's if your HMO doesn't deny the request for a specialist outright. And THAT's if you have health insurance at all, which many don't.

    1. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      How many people who are working full time at something other than fast food or pumping gas don't have health coverage? Come on now. I tend to think that health coverage gets to the peopel who produce the most. When I pumped gas for a few days as a teenager, I didn't have health coverage. What was I contributing to the world? A decade later, I have a professional career and great health insurance, because I produce valuable results and am worth something to my employer and society in general.

      If you don't contribute to society, why should you be allowed to sit around and do nothing and drain society? Exceptions, of course, for those who are truly sick and disabled. But most people are able bodied and simply lack the motivation to do something.

      I can only speak from my own experience, but I'm not a CEO or a manager or anything and about five years ago I felt a lump and thought I might have testicular cancer. I called my doctor and got in the same day. He sent me to the hospital for further examination the next morning. I had my results 24 hours after that. The cost to me? $10 for the doctor's visit. $20 for the hospital visit. Would I have gotten that in Canada? If not, then what good is it to me? Great, so someone who sits at home and watches television all day and works at a mcdonald's for 10 hours a week is able to get some form of coverage as long as they wait long enough (and who knows about the quality of care - I have no iddea). How does that help me or my employer if I have to take an entire day (or days or weeks) off to deal with something that I could have done instantly here?

      As soon as you get full health care coverage for every person with excellent service and quality and speed, let me know. The system here isn't perfect or even all that great - but neither is yours.

    2. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by Seumas · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And in case anyone wants to cry about how fast food people deserve health coverage too - don't worry. They get it. My mom works in fast food and has health coverage. My brother works at Radio Shack and has health coverage. Fuck, my girlfriend is a stripper and even SHE has health coverage.

      So where are all these full-time employed adults without any health coverage that I keep hearing about? I mean, everyone makes it sound like there are more people driving Escalades than have health coverage, so . . . I want to know. And of those who aren't full-time employed adults with employee health coverage - how many aren't getting health coverage from the state?

    3. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by KtHM · · Score: 1

      How about students, who are trying to work towards becoming a useful member of society?

    4. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by mgoren · · Score: 1



      alright, I'll bite.

      Let's see... pretty much the entire nyc film industry, as well as anyone else working as a so-called "freelancer." (Obviously this does not include those doing unionized work for the industry.)

    5. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Most HMOs cover your children as long as they're in school up until the age of 20-24. Many (or even most) schools offer very affordable health plans through the school (they're often subsidized by tuition).

      Not to mention, many or most students work. Many work full time and have coverage of their own. Nevertheless, why should all of society accept lower quality coverage so that a handful of people can get coverage? That doesn't seem terribly just.

      And can you imagine - with the amount of drinking, fucking, drugs, bad driving and partying done in college - what the health care costs could be?!

    6. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by Seumas · · Score: 2, Funny

      Should we include starving artists in that as well? If you're a depressed starving artist living in a loft and you spend your days drinking coffee and splattering paint on a canvas (or eating your body's impression out of a bread-mattress) that nobody will want to buy, you are OWED health care. Hell, society should owe you a fucking CAR! And a nice one, too!

    7. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      One statistic to shatter your arguement without bothering with your details:

      Half of personal bankruptcies are caused by medical bills

      Your arguements are therefore rendered moot by reality.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    8. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      That "argument" proves nobody has medical coverage as much as "most sex offenders consume porn" proves porn turns you into a sex offender.

    9. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Medical coverage is a moot point if people are going bankrupt regardless.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    10. Re:You may still have to wait in the U.S. by tepples · · Score: 1

      But most people are able bodied and simply lack the motivation to do something.

      Or, like myself, they lack the funds to move to where jobs are available.

  24. First we take Manhattan, then we take.... Toronto? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've already uprooted and left the US for another country.
    Japan in this case.
    I just couldn't get past America re-electing the failed
    ideologues in the White House. Pity the people have seen the err of
    their ways all too late. (ref: Bush's declining approval rating)

    Barring stumbling into marriage over here, I can't see myself
    staying forever though. A place like Canada is *extremely* attractive
    to me on a number of levels - it's similarity to America being just one.

    Having spent a bit of time in Toronto and Vancouver, they're both places
    I can easily see myself living in. They're not New York or Tokyo, mind
    you... but they do seem to be everything America believes itself to be -
    with Jesus wonderfully absent.

    The only problem I can see being an issue is that I don't particularly
    care for hockey... Is that a deal-breaker on naturalization?

  25. Canadian Cockroaches are friendlier... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    If you had the choice, would you really uproot to a new country especially one where the lifestyle isn't that much different than your own?

    It's not like people are being asked to move across the border to Mexico. There's a world of difference. The Canadian cockroach speaks English and French when saying, "You fat, ugly American!" :P

  26. No! You are mis-informed by bogaboga · · Score: 1
    > ..we have the best health care system in the world...

    I say "NO!" You are either mis-nformed or lying. You [once] had the best health care system in the world, but you are now near the middle I should say. I know because my relative who is a Canadian citizen, had to go India for hip replacement surgery. And thousands are. Yes, and the SARS crisis was mis-handled. The experts in the health care system admitted incopetence with SARS.

    For skin surgeries, people are going to Mexico. The aboriginals, who are the real Canadians, are being left on reserves with contaminated water. Do not tell me the problem was solved because it came a decade late! Yet the government has been running surpluses for that long.

    By the way, how are you treating the skilled immigrants in Canada? Even those who speak and write better English are not treated that well. But everyone knows they are more educated and carry a better work ethic than those they find on the streets.

    One thing I find good in Canada is Toronto. It's multiculturalism is awesome. On Toronto streets, you see all shades of people, and on the subway, it's hard to hear English. That's what I see in Toronto and it's good.

    1. Re:No! You are mis-informed by Hannah+E.+Davis · · Score: 1

      Vancouver is extremely multicultural too -- in fact, I've read that it won't be too many more years before whites are in the minority here. Political pamphlets are all written in English and Chinese, store signs are commonly in Chinese, Korean or Japanese with English added more as an afterthought, and like in Toronto, English is sometimes hard to hear on the buses and trains.

      It's neat, but I often do find myself wishing that I could speak Chinese :)

    2. Re:No! You are mis-informed by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      I know because my relative who is a Canadian citizen, had to go India for hip replacement surgery. And thousands are. Yes, and the SARS crisis was mis-handled. The experts in the health care system admitted incopetence with SARS.

      Whenever someone talks about health care, someone always brings up some anecdote that proves their case. How about good old fashioned metrics? You know, metrics like infant mortality, cancer survival rates, and lifespan. For instance here, with our "terrible" health-care system, you're more likely to survive a vast range of cancers than a lucky, insured individual in the US (and of course the same malady in a country like India is a quick death for a large percentage of the country). Of course in the US they have lots of large, marble-encrusted hospitals with blinkin' machines, but in practical medical terms the Canadian system is empirically superior in many measurable ways. Of course if you're uninsured in the US...

      SARS --- like any country could competently deal with that. India? Ha.

      The aboriginals, who are the real Canadians, are being left on reserves with contaminated water

      Wow, so you were around when the Aboriginals crossed the land bridge, and you can assure us that they were - with absolute certainty - the "real Canadians" and somehow (and contrary to the rest of the planet) got some sort of magical eternal deed. What a load of shit (and I'm part-Cree "Indian" btw. Actually there is aboriginal blood throughout a large percentage of birth Canadians). Reserves with contanimated water...you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about, or the bed that the native bands made themselves. Of course this line (the whole "real Canadians" thing) comes up when someone from some 3rd world shithole comes here and, looking around at the society and accomplishment, wants to decry it by claiming that it's really the "real Canadians". Give me a break.

      By the way, how are you treating the skilled immigrants in Canada? Even those who speak and write better English are not treated that well. But everyone knows they are more educated and carry a better work ethic than those they find on the streets.

      And here we come to the reality of your agenda - you came to Canada and actually had to compete, rather than having things handed to you on a silver spoon (as life is back home for most of the people who come here). So now you're, uh, "enlightening" the world with your great view. Funny stuff.

      BTW: It's interesting that every immigrant talks about how educated and hard working their group is, yet one of the reasons why immigrants find a tough time is that many businesses have been burned by the grossly overstated education of many of them, and a terrible, entitled work ethic. Must be racism though.

    3. Re:No! You are mis-informed by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      Oh, and regarding another of your comments.

      One thing I find good in Canada is Toronto. It's multiculturalism is awesome. On Toronto streets, you see all shades of people, and on the subway, it's hard to hear English. That's what I see in Toronto and it's good.

      The two languages of Canada are English and French, and in the very near future you can expect the requirements in those areas for immigrants is going to massively ramp up. Your claim that immigrants speak better English is, quite simply, a load of bullshit - many know a modicum of unworkable English, and revert to their native tongue at every opportunity (per your "hard to hear English" comment, however ridiculous it is. I live in Toronto, BTW). Their language never progresses, and they remain marginally employable in a English/French society.

      But whitey is to blame, somehow.

    4. Re:No! You are mis-informed by yabos · · Score: 1

      My aunt lives in Surey BC and she can't stand her neighbourhood due to the horrid smell of the Indian cooking.

    5. Re:No! You are mis-informed by bogaboga · · Score: 1
      > Your claim that immigrants speak better English is, quite simply, a load of bullshit - many know a modicum of unworkable English,...

      At least I can say that I found their English better than that of former prime minister Chretien...who once said..."A proof is a proof because it is nothing but a proof...and I know it's a proof because it's the proof..."

      And by the way, I'm no immigrant but know a lot about the immigrant troubles in Canada. We are in a global village remember. In a few decades the majority now in Canada, now will be the minority. At that time, life will be pretty interesting.

    6. Re:No! You are mis-informed by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      In a few decades the majority now in Canada, now will be the minority. At that time, life will be pretty interesting.

      How will that make life "interesting"? Is that like some sort of threat (like "once the whiteys are a minority, we're going to kill 'em all!")? Maladjusted minorities love to say this, as if they're a part of some common tribe - imagining that all "minorities" are a common group. Here's a hint - Someone with Chinese ancestry has little bonding or in common with blacks or Japanese or Indians or Latin Americans.

    7. Re:No! You are mis-informed by scorotron · · Score: 1

      I think you are the one that is misinformed. They still do those surgeries here, you just have to wait your turn. I don't know why you say that the aboriginals are the "real Canadians"......thats ridiculous, we all are Canadian and I was born here before many of them, how long someones ancestors has lived here means nothing....those ancestors are dead. I think your statement that the immigrants are more educated and harder workers than its current citizens is something only an idiot would say. I'll leave it at that. I like Toronto too, just the people are less friendly and the traffic is worse.

    8. Re:No! You are mis-informed by eosp · · Score: 1
      http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Chinese -- try that.

      And then learn how not to be a "niu bi"

    9. Re:No! You are mis-informed by Sj0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The aboriginal people are self governed, and they are not by any means underfunded. Their problems are entirely self-inflicted, and the productive natives should be up in arms over the disgusting behaviour of their bretheren.

      Billions are already spent on providing what SHOULD be excellent living conditions for a virtual handful of people. Instead, their corrupt self-government combines with the pitiful behaviour of people on reserves, leaving taxpayers with the cheque -- The Prime Minister just allocated 5 billion dollars to prevent suicides in native communities, which have pitifully reached epidemic levels.

      You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Until the native populations in canada grow up and start actually taking some responsibility for their actions(And some of them are atrocities -- My mother lived in the North, in a small mining community past Thompson Manitoba, and she has told me stories of natives feeding their kids drano to send them to the hospital because they don't want to get a babysitter while they went out drinking for the night) and their own self-government, they have absolutely no business blaming anyone but themselves for their situation. Rational natives should be extremely vocal in critisizing the unfortunate majority which is enforcing stereotypes and in so doing causing even natives who want to be productive in society untold grief.

      --
      It's been a long time.
  27. What seperates Canada from the US by Jorkapp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can see this initiative as targeting the citizenry of the United States. It makes perfect sense to target them, and here's why:

    US citizens already speak english, work with dollars and cents, drive cars on the right, etc. At the core, they're basically the same (less some cultural differences) as Canadians. Less government money spent on teaching them english or how to drive.

    Right now the Canadian dollar is at $0.85USD. The minimum wage in Ontario is at $7.45CDN/hour for an adult (slightly less for people who serve food/beverages and are subject to gratuities), which is more than $6.25USD/hour. Bear in mind too, that minimum wage is typically only paid to entry level jobs, and most other jobs pay more. I've heard horror stories of US Wal-Mart workers making maybe $5/hour - come up here and get a pay raise!

    Come on up boys, We've got plenty of room!

    --
    Frink: Nice try floyd, but you were designed for scrubbing, and scrubbing is what you shall do.
    1. Re:What seperates Canada from the US by Rickler · · Score: 1

      Minimum wage is $6.75 in cali.

      --

      The human race is artificial intelligence created using object orientated programming.
    2. Re:What seperates Canada from the US by JacobO · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I can see this initiative as targeting the citizenry of the United States.

      I do not agree. Firstly, the Canadian govt spends sweet fa on teaching immigrants anything. In fact it typically insists that they spend their own money getting "qualified" for something they can already do back in their home country. This might make it quicker for an American working in Canada under current NAFTA rules to just get residency, but Americans who move here seldom have any trouble becoming residents (other than the usual problems, such as the horrendous bureaucracy and $$ involved - I have been through it myself.)

      Regarding the wage numbers you give, you forgot to consider the generally higher taxation here in Canada.

      That said, depending on where you live in Canada, you can have a very good standard of living. There are definitely opportunities here and I too welcome more immigrants. Even those weird ones that drive on the left-hand side of the road and those who use weird currency like the yuan.

      On a related note, someone please teach Canadians to drive.

    3. Re:What seperates Canada from the US by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      Right now the Canadian dollar is at $0.85USD. The minimum wage in Ontario is at $7.45CDN/hour for an adult (slightly less for people who serve food/beverages and are subject to gratuities), which is more than $6.25USD/hour. Bear in mind too, that minimum wage is typically only paid to entry level jobs, and most other jobs pay more. I've heard horror stories of US Wal-Mart workers making maybe $5/hour - come up here and get a pay raise!

      Or -- stay the hell out! Immigration is a country's opportunity to recruit the best and the brightest from around the world to enrich one's country. Far too many countries, Canada included, squander this potential on unskilled welfare bums and their extended families who are a net drain on their new country. Governments should stop this.

    4. Re:What seperates Canada from the US by ktwombley · · Score: 1
      come up here and get a pay raise!

      The obvious problem is that poor people can't afford to uproot themselves entirely and move somewhere totally new and set their life up again.

      Anyone with the resources to do is simply isn't concerned about minimum wage.

    5. Re:What seperates Canada from the US by Maglos · · Score: 1

      I dont think Wal-Mart employees is the skilled labour we where looking for. as far as socialism is concerned, when other people are happy I'm happy, I'm willing to sacrifice a little extra for that.

    6. Re:What seperates Canada from the US by Jorkapp · · Score: 1

      Immigration is a country's opportunity to recruit the best and the brightest from around the world to enrich one's country.

      We already have many of the best and the brightest - almost too many it seems. 30% of adult Canadians have bachelor's degrees or better, the highest percent per capita in the industrialized world. The trouble is, we are having labor short-falls in less-skilled, semi-skilled, and skilled positions. Too few Canadians are seeking employment in trades, be it as journey(wo)men, apprentices, or in less-skilled positions. Curse our extensive education systems!

      If we can import a few hundred thousand US citizens with skilled trade qualifications or college-level (read: non-university) education and save the hassle of giving them student loans (as the government would for a Canadian Citizen), teaching them to read/write/speak english/how to drive on the right (as some non-north american/european require), or many other extensive/expensive government endavours, so much the better.

      Even better, we could boost our military by importing US soldiers who don't want to fight in Iraq, but want all the benefits the army/navy/air force has to offer. If you thought my mentioning the minimum wage pay-boost was nothing significant, get a load of this. Full-time enlisted personnel at NATO rank E-0 (Private in both countries) make around $12000USD/year in the US. Not bad, but in Canada it's $28000CDN/year (just below $24000USD/year), plus benefits and perks second to none!

      Canadian legislation allows for importing of military personnel as well. Of course, the requirement is that the Minister of National Defence must extend an invitation to an individual, which is required to overcome the "Canadian Citizen" requirement to join. Still, a pretty substantial pay increase.

      --
      Frink: Nice try floyd, but you were designed for scrubbing, and scrubbing is what you shall do.
    7. Re:What seperates Canada from the US by birge · · Score: 1

      Yup. Come on up and gain a 10% increase in pay and a 50% increase in cost of living! Whoo hoo! That's a total of almost 60%!!!

  28. Would I? by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Sure.

    Why not? America has become hostile towards it's citizens, I mean obviously the government has chosen to bite off the hand that feeds it.
    What with all the outsourcing and offshoring and imported crap from third world countries, it would seem obvious that the US Government doesn't care about the people, only about the profiteers on Wall Street and the Elite Banksters that pad the pockets of the politicians that make the laws that keep making the rich richer and the poor poorer.

    If there is a country that is intelligent enough to understand that the well being of ALL it's citizens is the key to it's survival then I would say that sounds like a pretty good place to be.

    1. Re:Would I? by pair-a-noyd · · Score: 1

      troll? I think not. +5 TRUTH

    2. Re:Would I? by ksheff · · Score: 1

      That depends on the Republican.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
  29. Warm weather by phorm · · Score: 4, Informative

    Pick a season then. In the summer it's about 25-30c (77-86f), in the winter I've been as low as -40c/f, but generally we're in the -10 to -20 (14 to -4) range or milder. Right now it's about 4c (39.2f)

    1. Re:Warm weather by theCoder · · Score: 1

      Right now, it's about 68f (20c). I like snow as much as the next guy, but I think I'll stick it out here for a little while :P

      --
      "Save the whales, feed the hungry, free the mallocs" -- author unknown
  30. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by JohnWiney · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Better economy?? The Toronto Stock Exchange index is up 20% so far this year - the Dow Jones is down. The past few years have had similar results - and that is without taking into account the changes in the currencies. The Canadian federal government has posted a surplus each of the past seven years. The US government, uh, has not. Canadian unemployment levels are nearing record low levels....

  31. The Real Question by CyberLife · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's your feeling about people immigrating TO the United States? If one applies your position equally to all countries of the world, nobody should ever leave their native land. Are you advocating that? This country is largely populated by immigrants and those descended from immigrants. I don't know the details of your family background, but chances are they were immigrants at some point. Should they have stayed in their home country? Should you have instead been born and grown up there instead of here?

    1. Re:The Real Question by typedef · · Score: 1

      It's actually really simple.

      If you don't agree with your country's government, yet still retain your basic freedoms, a comparativley high standard of living and the ability to peacefully organize and change your government, then it's probably a good idea to stick around. Even having one of these things is a good reason to stay.

      If you're living in a country where you get sent to a gulag for wearing shirts that are too flashy, have to live in fear of being massacred by some warlord, or are starving to death because your crops are diseased and have failed, then getting out of dodge would seem to be a prudent option.

    2. Re:The Real Question by CyberLife · · Score: 1
      By that logic, nobody born in a free country like America should ever leave the immediate location of their birth. Why should they move across town or to another state when they have all of those good things that you mention right where they are? Why is it acceptable to abandon a local or state government but not a national one?

      You seem to be suggesting that, regardless of one's personal feelings and aspirations, they should only move under certain circumstances and not others. Who defines that criteria, and who is to say that it's equally acceptable to all?

    3. Re:The Real Question by typedef · · Score: 1

      You seem to be suggesting that, regardless of one's personal feelings and aspirations, they should only move under certain circumstances and not others.

      Sorry, I guess I kind of misread your post. I wasn't talking about moving from town A to town B, I was talking about unfavorable circumstances in which someone may elect to *flee* their country. Of course people move all over the place for a variety of reasons, I'm certainly not saying that's wrong, but the context of the discussion was Americans expatriating because they're "annoyed" with the current government. I was simply saying that as long as you have the ability to change your government, like the GP post said, expatriating would probably only make the problem worse.

  32. Policy Changes by JohnWiney · · Score: 2, Informative

    Please note that these changes are directed at people already in Canada - foreign students, for example. Canada already has the highest levels of immigration in the world from outside the country (at least on a per-capita basis).

  33. Not really by brunes69 · · Score: 1

    At the core, they're basically the same (less some cultural differences) as Canadians...

    You can't say that Canadians are "basically the same" as Americans simply because you drive your car on the right hand side of the road. That is like saying you are "basically the same" as a polar bear because you are both mammals.

    Canadians and Americans are very different when it comes to politics. What is considered a liberal politician in the U.S. would normally be called a conservitive politican in Canada. Canadian citizens generally swing far more to the left than Americans on most issues.

    There are also huge differences in economic policy ond diplomatic policies between the two contries. There are also huge culterual differences between them, mostly due to the fact that Canada was founded by people who *wanted* to remain loyal to the Crown, while Americanw as founded based on the idea of seperating from the Crown.

    Oh, and Canada has less fat people per capita :)

  34. Re:Rather to Alabama by Monkofdoom · · Score: 1

    He may be, but then the Canadians want to keep all there skilled staff including those

    --
    - http://www.howstuffbreaks.com/ We break stuff so you don't have to
  35. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by shobadobs · · Score: 1

    Canadian unemployment levels are nearing record low levels....

    And your "record low level" is 6.6%. During our "recession," we hit a high of 6.3.

  36. You can be a thief, too! by dada21 · · Score: 2

    The Canadian government wants to rob the citizens of $700,000,000 and give it to programmers. Why not just arm yourself, go to your neighbor's house in the U.S., and take their money?

    It is the same thing. Don't believe the hype, read deeper.

    1. Re:You can be a thief, too! by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1, Funny

      What are you?? Some kind of libertarian scum? If you let people keep their money, all they'll do is spend it foolishly on stuff they only think they need. Instead you have to tax away a substantial portion of people's income so the government can spend it wisely on stuff the government knows they need. You just have to learn to trust the government more. They're here to help you, you see. With hatchet, axe, and saw.
      -russ

      --
      Don't piss off The Angry Economist
    2. Re:You can be a thief, too! by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Hi, I am a liberterian. I am pro abortion, pro prostitution, pro guns, pro drugs, anti farm subsidies, anti mining subsidies, anti logging subsidies. I want to sell all the national forests to the higest bidder, I want to eliminate all health, safety, and pollution regulations and simultaniously severly limit your ability to sue corporations. I am anti union, anti overtime, anti minimum wage, and I want to make it legal for companies to discriminate against any racial, religious, sex, sexuality, or for any group actually.

      Please vote for me.

      LOL!.

      With a platform like that I am shocked you guys don't run the world.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    3. Re:You can be a thief, too! by justins · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, ten times $700 million, 7 billion, is roughly what we spend in Iraq in roughly a month and a half. Sad but true.

      --
      Now before I get modded down, I be to remind whoever might read this that what I am saying is FACT. - bogaboga
    4. Re:You can be a thief, too! by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      The Canadian government wants to rob the citizens of $700,000,000 and give it to programmers.

      The thing about highly skilled workers is that they are a net benefit to the country they're in and are therefore a worthy cause to invest in, creating innovation, jobs, technology, and a tax base. Things like welfare, farmer subsidies, and aboriginal welfare are a net loss and are not worthy of investment.

    5. Re:You can be a thief, too! by illusion_2K · · Score: 1

      You're obviously not a Canadian. The bigger concern up here is getting doctors and nurses at the moment, nevermind the economic impact of programmers-vs-whatever.

      But even more than that, Canada (and the rest of the West) needs immigrants. Statistics Canada just reported that the average number of children for families is now 1.5, meaning that our population would be in decline save for immigration. Looking at the big picture, this would (and will be for some countries) disasterous. Think of things like pensions and all the healthcare costs associated with aging populations.

      Thankfully we don't have people like you making our public policy up here.

    6. Re:You can be a thief, too! by ritzer · · Score: 1

      Exactly right, it seems the penny dropped at slashdot. Speaking as a canadian, let me assure you that Canada is one of the world's most overtaxed nations. Is that possibly one of the big reasons that they are not keeping people who earn higher than average salaries? The high taxes go to fund programs costing 700 million, said to help stop people from leaving the country?! Talk about a circular argument. Contrary to popular opinion, socialism didn't die with the Soviet Union, it's kicking in the throes of yet another dieing nation.

    7. Re:You can be a thief, too! by edunbar93 · · Score: 1

      Heh. Cute. Except that the government is already taking that money from us in the first place. They're just doing silly things with it currently, like paying off the national debt, thus improving the economic stability of the country.

      --
      "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
    8. Re:You can be a thief, too! by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised also, actually. I can pick any one of those items and defend them (I mean, the real ones, not the ones you're trolling with).
      -russ

      --
      Don't piss off The Angry Economist
  37. Canada vs. USA by Simonetta · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The question of living in Canada vs USA depends a lot on your skill set (job qualifications), home language, tolerance of bad weather, politics, and intoxicational preference.

        Let's say you have a good job skill set and can get a job more or less either north or south of the 49th parallel. If you speak French as a native language, you'll most likely feel more comfortable in Quebec. If you speak Spanish as a home language, Miami, Los Angeles, or New York would be more confortable. This issue is neutral for native English or other language speakers, eh?

        If you don't really like the cold, but don't mind dark gloomy rainy days (say you're a goth programmer or gamer), Vancouver BC would definitely beat the rest of Canada, New England, California, or Florida (too much sunshine).

        Fascists, either Christian or racial, will definitely feel more at home in the USA. It's your kind of place.

        Cannibus lovers, ('Stoners' to everyone else) will be more comfortable in British Columbia than anywhere in the USA, except possibly Maui. Not even the Humboldt Thunderbolt beats the BC bud. And you're less likely to have a Hummerload of psycho Iraqi vets kicking in your door and sticking machine guns or tasers in your kid's faces at 3am if you smoke in British Columbia instead of the USA. That's important to some people, less to others.

        In general, everything that you buy in a store is cheaper in the USA. Canada has insane sales taxes on top of high prices. This is the big issue for most people deciding USA vs. Canada. Big income taxes too. However the money collected in taxes mostly gets back to the Canadian people in some form, whereas in the US taxes paid go mostly to giant corporations with fat government contracts.

        However if you're gonna get sick, try to get sick in Canada instead. With the new bankruptcy laws in the USA, along with a corrupt and insanely expensive health care system there, you'll be in debt forever if you need medical care in the USA. Like if you get shot. The US has more guns than people, Canada doesn't.

    1. Re:Canada vs. USA by poptones · · Score: 1

      In general, everything that you buy in a store is cheaper in the USA. Canada has insane sales taxes on top of high prices.... However, the money collected in taxes mostly gets back to the Canadian people in some form, whereas in the US taxes paid go mostly to giant corporations with fat government contracts.

      Aha! But "giant corporations" doing what? Selling and providng services...

      So, in Canada the money gets back to the people via the government, and in the US it gets back to the people via Wal-Mart... what's the difference?

    2. Re:Canada vs. USA by IdleTime · · Score: 2, Insightful
      So, in Canada the money gets back to the people via the government, and in the US it gets back to the people via Wal-Mart... what's the difference?
      I would like to point you towards the Forbes 500 richest list. I think you will see several Waltons with billion dollar fortunes. So, the money DOES NOT go back to the people. If you add up all the cost of all the extra insurance and pension funds that you need here in the US, I think you'll find that the difference is marginal if any at all. Lower taxes and cheaper prices does not necessarily mean cheaper totally. Think of it as Total Cost of Ownership like we do in IT and you'll see that you probably pay more in USA than in Canada.
      --
      If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
    3. Re:Canada vs. USA by udowish · · Score: 3, Informative

      "In general, everything that you buy in a store is cheaper in the USA. Canada has insane sales taxes on top of high prices. This is the big issue for most people deciding USA vs. Canada. Big income taxes too. However the money collected in taxes mostly gets back to the Canadian people in some form, whereas in the US taxes paid go mostly to giant corporations with fat government contracts." BS, the only thing lavishly higher is booze and smokes in my experience almost everything else is CHEAPER in Canada and I have travelled all over the US. That goes for food, insurance, housing etc etc.

      --
      when in doubt press enter and we'll figure it out later..
    4. Re:Canada vs. USA by gumpish · · Score: 1

      3. The basic necessities of life here (especially tobacco) are insanely expensive.

      You're pathetic.

    5. Re:Canada vs. USA by killjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also if you are gay or a muslim you are much more likely to be accepted in Canada then the US.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    6. Re:Canada vs. USA by edbosanquet · · Score: 1

      You will see several Waltons on the Forbes 500 but I wish to point out that much of that weath is on paper. Not to say these people are going to be poor anytime soon but if Wal-mart stock crashes then the Walton family will no longer be as high up as they are now. Since thier money is invested they are not really living off the vast majority of it and the employees of Wal-mart and it's customers are the current beneficiaries of most of that money. In other words their money is currently out in society doing good for society. If Wal-mart get tax breaks and it causes the big corperation to hire more people or lower prices (both of which Wal-mart has done in spades) then society benefits from those tax breaks. Compared to the amount of money that Wal-mart has generated for society (both in the form of employment and lower prices) the amout the Waltons have taken is a mear pitance. I would much rather have choice between several big corperations then be forced to deal with big goverment. If someone happens to get rich in the process good for them. If they start trying to get too rich and charge me too much then provided there isn't a monopoly (goverment action may be necessary) then I chose to go somewhere else. Thus society and myself are better off. Once again just because someone else benefits more than I do does not mean I am hurt.

      Life is not a zero sum game.

    7. Re:Canada vs. USA by Liam+Slider · · Score: 1
      Fascists, either Christian or racial, will definitely feel more at home in the USA. It's your kind of place.
      Oh please, as much as people joke about George W Bush...he's nowhere near being Hitler, and the USA is nowhere near Nazi Germany. I mean gee, for a fascist country we sure have a lot of freedom of speech and freedom of press. Especially compared to many other so-called "democratic" western nations. And even freedom of religion as well. I'm not a Christian, and I'm an American. A proud one at that.
      Cannibus lovers, ('Stoners' to everyone else) will be more comfortable in British Columbia than anywhere in the USA, except possibly Maui. Not even the Humboldt Thunderbolt beats the BC bud.
      Please, it's the #1 cash crop in the United States. And there are a lot of places where local law enforcement doesn't give a shit if you're smoking it, they aren't going to go out of their way to hunt down people smoking a couple of joints. If they catch you with it while doing something stupid though...or selling it... I don't smoke it myself, but I do agree that it's stupid that it's illegal, it's no worse of a drug than alcohol afterall...and prohibition didn't exactly help there.
      The US has more guns than people, Canada doesn't.
      Good. Last I heard gun ownership was a right. Same as me being able to tell you what an idiot you are.
    8. Re:Canada vs. USA by OverkillTASF · · Score: 1

      These rich people aren't hoarding their money in mattresses. They're putting it in the bank (Which then uses it for loans and investments) or investing it (which supports other businesses). No matter what you do with your money, you are redistributing it. Unless of course, you actually DO favor that stuffing it in the mattress approach.

    9. Re:Canada vs. USA by Mouse42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is so true and so sad.

      I am dating an Arab - not even a muslim! - and I'm getting so much flack from my family. They are insistant that he is going to _become_ muslim. They even told me he was going to manipulate me into becoming a suicide bomber myself!

      The insane degree of idiocy to believe such things astounds me.

      I'm reading through these comments because the idea of moving to Canada is actually appealing simply for the social freedom.....

    10. Re:Canada vs. USA by agraupe · · Score: 1

      And why do Americans travel to Costa Rica and India for medical care? Let me explain this to you: if you can't pay for medical care in Canada, you won't be in debt for the rest of your life. That's the difference. Sure, your health might be better in the US, but if you can't afford the cost of your treatment (especially if it's something big), you will have almost no standard of living at any point after that any way. I'd prefer to have a system where, if I hurt myself or get sick, I can go to the doctor without wondering how I'll pay for it. I'd prefer a system where people with relatively minor ailments receive treatment for them before they worsen, and create a bigger drag on the social safety net. Sure, waiting times for procedures such as MRIs is the natural byproduct, but you will get one in the end, and you'll be financially solvent thereafter. Therein lies the difference between Canadian and American style healthcare.

    11. Re:Canada vs. USA by Catbeller · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They've (the wealthy, like the Waltons ) been spending their no-tax windfall by buying other companies, and buying back their own company's stock to privatize their corporations. What they aren't doing with the money is spending it on new jobs, which is what the putative purpose of the cuts are for; no less authority than the American Enterprise Institute states that, to their surprise, the newly released wealth is not returning to the economy at large, but is "going into the matresses".

      When the economy tanks in the next year or so, all that hoarded wealth will be released to purchase stock and real estate at greatly deflated prices. They'll make a bundle on our economic disaster, eventually, when the US climbs out of its debt hole (by raising taxes and cutting public spending) and the value of the holdings they will purchase at fire-sale prices go back up.

      Supply side economics, as Reagan's budget director David Stockman admitted, is a con to lower taxes on the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. He should know, as he was Reagan's salesman to congress.

      Supply side cuts have failed. Jobs are gone, poverty is up, aid to the poor is going, we're trillions in the hole in debt to China, the wealthy are insanely wealthy and poised to become mega-wealthy after the crash caused by the tax cuts and borrowing. Bush believes in his supply side cuts. But, as we've seen, his beliefs are gut-based, not fact-based, and his gut is unbelieveably incorrect about reality. He simply didn't believe in his own college education, and certainly had his own ideas about economics, his Harvard professor says. Faith-based economics, welfare is communism, government is evil, all that.

      Economic booms are based on the price of oil, not tax cuts. Reagan cut taxes and increased spending, sending us into a spiral that mirrors today's death swirl, but he was saved by one thing: OPEC's pricing discipline collapsed in the early Eighties. So much wealth, which had been hemorraging to the middle eastern princes since 1973, suddenly flooded into the American economy. We sang with power and money and grew, even as the debt ballooned. Reagan was a lucky bugger: his supply side con would have ruined him had OPEC not collapsed.

      Bush the senior had to raise taxes to stop the disaster that supply side created. He paid for it by losing a chance at a second term.

      Bush the junior came into office believing, as all the other conservatives did, in the Reagan Miracle. He was wrong: the miracle was the OPEC collapse that saved the old fool from the folly of believing the pack of thieves that sold him on the supply-side con.

      So, Bush slammed straight into OPEC and the oil companies ascendant, believing that tax cuts were the solution to all, that government was the problem, and that debt would eventually force the death of the New Deal programs the wealthy hated so. It's five years later, and the International Monetary Fund is telling us we can crash hard or crash soft -- but we will crash, when the Chinese and all the others lending us money cut us off. They will dictates terms to US. And Bush will probably react by screaming at his aides and locking himself away from the public, which is pretty much his reponse to every challenge.

      After the crash, the very people who keep selling the supply side con will be flush with offshore cash. They will swoop in and buy cheap, while taxes for the lesser mortals go up 20% to try to stop the bleeding. And oh yep -- they will be the ones who'll be lending us money to shore up the tax base, so they'll make a trillion bucks in interest alone in the next couple of decades -- paid for by tax payers.

      Yup, the money is in the mattress - for now.

    12. Re:Canada vs. USA by Vicissidude · · Score: 2, Funny

      The poor, poor Waltons. They have no money to speak of since it's all tied up in stock. And everyone's out to get them because they provide plenty of well-paying jobs to the community while all but giving away high quality goods. They provide great benefits for their employees while taking absolutely nothing from the government. We should all bow before the great Waltons and the sacrifices they make for all of us.

    13. Re:Canada vs. USA by wmspringer · · Score: 1

      Cannibus lovers, ('Stoners' to everyone else) will be more comfortable in British Columbia than anywhere in the USA, except possibly Maui. Not even the Humboldt Thunderbolt beats the BC bud. Please, it's the #1 cash crop in the United States. And there are a lot of places where local law enforcement doesn't give a shit if you're smoking it, they aren't going to go out of their way to hunt down people smoking a couple of joints.

      Some places are getting more sensible...Denver voters just legalized it (well, kinda - it's still against state law)

      I think smoking is moronic, but I also don't think it's any of my business provided you're not doing it in my general area.

    14. Re:Canada vs. USA by Belseth · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah, we got a Republican in the woodpile. In the good ole days they called that trickle down economics or as we at the bottom liked to call it piss down economics. The rich don't benevolently sprinkle their money down like fairy dust they horde it. The average person can't aford to save the bulk of their income so if you want to improve the economy let the average person have more and stop giving all the advantages to the rich. The big tax give back was a joke because the average person saw little of it and most of that went to pay bills. The tax cuts were a scam because they came snaeking back in the form of stealth taxes. All those cuts in deductions you're starting to see are part of that. No we won't raise your taxes but we'll take away your deductions thus raising your taxes without officially raising them. Services are being cut and fees are going up in an effort to balance the books. There's no free lunch and if the rich want to feast the rest of us have to pay for it. Thinking that we are better off with the corporations getting the tax money than the people only makes sense if you are a major corporation. If you claim it creates jobs apparently you aren't paying attention. There's been a blood bath of job cuts for many years now. Most of it so they can send the jobs overseas. Yes the money creates jobs, in China.

    15. Re:Canada vs. USA by MrAndrews · · Score: 1

      I thought it was a pretty nice day today. I much prefer the summers to Ottawa, too. I don't know what your experience is in the rest of the country, but I figure Ontario is a much cheaper place to live than Victoria. This place is a bit of a pocket of high prices, but definitely not the norm.

      The private health insurance bit is true, but I think you're muddling the whole country together. For those of you in Ontario: in BC, you have to pay for your MSP (equivalent to OHIP) every month like a bill. I didn't appreciate how it worked till I got here (in Ontario they just take part of your taxes for health care, so you don't have to feel like it costs you anything directly). It makes the idea of private health insurance a lot more appealing, because right now you pay $80/month for crappy service. Not that you'll die from the crappiness, but it won't get as luxurious as it might in the US, if you had the money.

      That said, we have a great free press here (if you look for it, just like in the US), outside of Shawland there are great internet options, and tobacco SHOULD be more expensive because it helps people stop thinking it's a necessity of life :) [Just be thankful you're not in Ottawa, where smoking is prohibited just about everywhere but the darkest corner of your garage]

      I wish more tech-minded folks would move to Victoria, so we could start a company or something. Telecommuting is a lonely way to work.

    16. Re:Canada vs. USA by jellybear · · Score: 1

      Thank you. I hate assholes with persecution complexes that read hidden meanings into everything.

    17. Re:Canada vs. USA by Aeron65432 · · Score: 1
      Your comment is fairly objective until you hit " Fascists, either Christian or racial, will definitely feel more at home in the USA. It's your kind of place."

      Way to be.

    18. Re:Canada vs. USA by andymadigan · · Score: 1

      Both nationalcenter.org and heritage.org are extroadinarily conservative "think tank" sites. I would classify that with propaganda, not research.

      --
      The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
    19. Re:Canada vs. USA by saitoh · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'll add a fundimental difference of defining objectives/principles in a sociological sense to consider:

      US: "Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness"
      Canada: "Peace, order, and good government"

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace,_order_and_good _government

      --
      We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
    20. Re:Canada vs. USA by kilrogg · · Score: 1
      BS, the only thing lavishly higher is booze and smokes in my experience almost everything else is CHEAPER in Canada and I have travelled all over the US. That goes for food, insurance, housing etc etc.

      That was true a few years ago, but with the major devaluation of the American dollar (US$1 went from being worth about C$1.6 to C$1.17) that is simply no longer true. I haven't noticed ANY price drops in Canada as the C$ rose in value, retailers are presumably just pocketing the extra profits. Cross-border shopping is looking very attractive these days for Canadians.

    21. Re:Canada vs. USA by Catbeller · · Score: 1

      Falmebait, informative, whatever. It's the simple truth.

    22. Re:Canada vs. USA by kilrogg · · Score: 1
      So, in Canada the [tax] money gets back to the people via the government, and in the US it gets back to the people via Wal-Mart... what's the difference?

      We have Wal-Mart up here in Canada, so by your logic, some of the American taxes "gets back" to Canadians too ;-)

    23. Re:Canada vs. USA by farrellj · · Score: 2, Informative

      I spent 2 and a half years in North Carolina, having been recruited from Canada. I had accepted because finding a tech job is very, very hard there...and still is.

      Although I found housing to be cheaper, and many consumer goods...food was the same price, which meant everything was 20-30% more expensive. The tax rate was chaper, but there were more types of taxes. for example, I had to paid a tax to the city for the car, which I had never done in Canada, and the cost of health care insurance was huge. Drugs were very expensive, even with the co-pay. The antihistamine I use, Zirtec in the US, cost me a $30 (USD) co-pay. In Canada, Reactin, (same medication, different name) is half that in CDN dollars...which means I am paying about $13 USD for it.

      Another example...Coca-Cola, which in Canada you can buy in slabs of 24 cans, usually for $7.99 CDN were absent in NC, and the 12 packs were $4.99 USD. As well, after I moved back, I am finding that computer equipment, with the exception of complete systems, are cheaper.

      But things are not all rosy in Canada, either. We have one big problem here...the Human Resources people.

      Since the meltdown of Nortel, there has been a glut of highly qualified techies. Between Notrel's layoffs, and the trickle-down effect, some estimate over 20,000 techies were released into the Canadian tech job market. Because of of this, the HR people have been able to get very specific in what they are looking for, and used to be able to find it. But now, most people have either left the tech field, or Canada, and still the HR people are very specific in what they are looking for, and are not willing to look at equivelent qualifications. For example, if you know AIX, Linux of many flavours, SCO, Solaris and Tru-64, chances are you could pick up HP-UX in a couple of weeks of on the job experience.

      I spent an hour chatting with a former Federal Government HR person, and she said that the burnout rate in the HR field is very high, on the order of 2 to 3 years, so even if an HR person learns that someone who knows MS Word 2000 could probably do OK with Word 2003, they don't forward the resume to the manager who needs the talent to run his business.

      That is why there is a tech shortage, not a lack of techies!

      ttyl
                Farrell McGovern

      --
      CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
    24. Re:Canada vs. USA by RITMaloney · · Score: 1

      I have one addition to your list of "Why Canada is more better than America." ... In Canada the Streets are Paved with Gold!

    25. Re:Canada vs. USA by SleepyCat2 · · Score: 1

      Just asking out of curiosity, if you hate it so much, then why don't you pack and move south?

      I've never lived in the US but from a dozen times that I have traveled south I figured they make more money, it is warmer down there and jobs are less scarce.

      I think it is more a matter of choice (or taste) to live up here, or down there. So, Victoria doesn't seem to make your clock tick, then why are you stuck up there?

    26. Re:Canada vs. USA by ph4s3 · · Score: 1

      HAHAHA

      MOD PARENT UP!

    27. Re:Canada vs. USA by agraupe · · Score: 1
      I agree that the two-tiered system, for all the bad press it receives in Canada (mainly due to the NDP, may I add) is superior to the system we have in place. That being said, I believe the system we have in place is better than the American system.

      In addition to this, consider that any time anyone tries to introduce a system with even the slightest hint of two-tieredness, they get flamed to a crisp in the press. Ralph Klein has tried to introduce a system where, if you want a more expensive procedure, you can pay for that instead of whatever you'd get otherwise. This still covers all necessary medical procedures free of charge, but the press is still attacking him left, right, and center. Another place (I think it's BC) introduced the idea of having small pay-for-care clinics to do procedures such as MRIs (if my memory serves me correctly; it could be something else). They have been lambasted in the press, called "boutique healthcare" and so on.

      A public/private split in the healthcare system would certainly be a vast improvement compared to what we have now, but the option still must remain to get healthcare free-of-charge if you are unable to pay for it. Right now, wealthy Canadians are just using other countries (the US, commonly, but I've also heard of people going to India) as their "private healthcare provider".

    28. Re:Canada vs. USA by edbosanquet · · Score: 1

      Because Wal-mart hires unskilled workers at market price does not mean that they are still not hiring people and giving jobs to the community by providing a service. No one is forced to have a job at Wal-mart and no one is froced to shop at Wal-mart. Many people find it worth while to shop there and to be empolyed there. If not for the Waltons then people would not have the option to shop there or work there. The Waltons might have gotten rich but they got rich honestly. Because of the Waltons the world is a better place to live and the cost to society of them having wealth is far offset by the benefit they provided to socity.

    29. Re:Canada vs. USA by Liam+Slider · · Score: 1
      I suppose gun ownership is a right, but is shooting every other person part of that same right? How about when a child steals your gun, goes to school and shoots a bunch of students/teachers? Do they have the right to do that?
      Of course not.
      Having rights of ownership is one thing, but all the wrong people own guns for all the wrong reasons. What's the point in ever owning a handgun? A lot of my family owns rifles, for hunting, but none own handguns...it's pointless.
      The vast majority of gun owners in the United States have never fired a gun in anger, nor will they. A rather huge number are hunters. Those with handguns...most of them own them for self/home defense purposes. Now what I find pointless, is that you sound like you want to heavily restrict people's rights to just hunting purposes...when the right was not protected for people to be able to hunt (although that's an important use, many people need to hunt to feed their families), but for the security of the nation...as an armed populace can more easily throw off tyranny, either foreign or domestic. Armed citizens are the last line of defense for the USA, idiotic restrictions on what types of firearms they can use in the field against an enemy would be pointless.
    30. Re:Canada vs. USA by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      No we won't raise your taxes but we'll take away your deductions thus raising your taxes without officially raising them.

      Ah. So you're in favor of a tax code that is hugely complex and chock full of loopholes and little games for people to play. Are you perhaps a tax lawyer? Why the love for complicated byzantine tax codes??

      --
      resigned
    31. Re:Canada vs. USA by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      she said that the burnout rate in the HR field is very high, on the order of 2 to 3 years,

      Is there a fund, or a charity anywhere that we can contribute to, that promotes an increase in the burn rate??

      Burn! Baby! Burn!

      All those sociologists and naddering twits spontaneously combusting! What a sweet thought!

      --
      resigned
    32. Re:Canada vs. USA by uimedic · · Score: 1

      Medical care is a scarce resource. There are only so many MRIs, CTs, trained providers, pacemakers, etc. Government-run distribution systems for scarce resources are generally inefficient and bureaucratic. Market forces are generally efficient, but "cold." In the government-run system, committees limit demand by rationing. In the market system, demand is limited by price (as a proxy for supply). At the end of the day, it is a value judgement. One of enormous consequence.

      Cananda and other government-run systems offer many services developed only because the US market exists. The bastardized US "market" system (such as it is) still generally allows the makers of medical technologies and products to set their own price. Companies take advantage of this by setting their US price such that they usually make back their development investment and fixed costs in the US market. They can then compete aggressively for foreign contracts that allow them to expand marketshare and realize economies of scale. Even if they sell their products just slightly above their variable cost; every dollar over that variable cost is profit.

      If the US system goes "government" and the feds start bargaining for price, one of two things will happen. The creators of these health products will either be squeezed out of business, or they will have to raise prices on the stuff they sell to other government-run systems. Translation: the gravy train will run out for Canada and systems like it. The corollary is that R&D investments in health technologies will become a far less attractive than they already are (they aren't exactly pretty now given the costs of FDA approval and potential liability).

      Advertising that you go to the doctor "without worrying about how I'll pay for it" is basically like advertising that you go to the car dealership "without worrying about how I'll pay for it." You're either very wealthy or spending someone elses money. Healthcare is not a right. It is a scarce resource we are privileged to have available. Those who say it is a right generally don't plan on providing that "right" themselves or with their own money.

      UI

      --
      Diagnosis: you are paranoid. As luck would have it, you're also being followed.
    33. Re:Canada vs. USA by Vicissidude · · Score: 1

      Because of the Waltons the world is a better place to live and the cost to society of them having wealth is far offset by the benefit they provided to socity.

      Buwahahaha! LMFAO.... You KILL me man! Really....

    34. Re:Canada vs. USA by hr+raattgift · · Score: 1
      In Canada the Streets are Paved with Gold!


      Have you ever been to Washington, D.C., the capital of the world's richest country? The District's streets are barely paved at all!

      Whole busses get lost in the potholes, you know.
    35. Re:Canada vs. USA by Iago515 · · Score: 1
      There is no such thing as a "good" healthcare system as measured by those internal and external. I'm living in Germany right now, which has a two-tiered system and from what I see, it's not very good either. The problem with that is it actually punishes the lower middle class.

      Now I can't say I'm 100% correct as my German sucks and I haven't read that much about it so my experience is mostly anecdotal. Anyways, take two people, one who makes 40k a year and one who makes 45k/year (all numbers are guesses, I don't know what the change actually is, it might less). The first person, who is forced to be on the public health system actually pays more than the second person because the government wants to make the health care system pay for itself. What this means is that the people who earn the most out of those who are in the public system pay for those who don't earn as much.

      As well, my girlfriend had to see a specialist and was told there was a long waiting list to get in to see this person (even though she's a physician herself (and on the cusp of the tiers financially wise, that's how I know anything about this)), but when she just happened to mention she has private insurance they took her the next day. A similar thing happened to a student of mine, he's private so got in much quicker than he normally would have.

      In other words, the only ones who benefit from a two-tiered system are those who make a lot of money, the rest of the middle class suffer from it. In the end, though, it is basically impossible for the layman to "decide" which is a better system, as there are so many variables that would take a lot of study to decide. For instance, does the system provide for dental? How about prescription drugs? What are the obligations of the insurer once the client ages?

      As for me, the two-tiered system will suck in the future. Right now I'm on a "foreigners" private health care, and it only costs me about $120 US/month, but if I'm here longer than 5 years I'll have to go onto a regular private health plan, and since I haven't been on it since I was in my 20's or early 30's I'll have to pay a lot more. I'm won't be eligible for the government system, even if I get permanent residency, because I'm self-employed, so either I come up with a way to make more money or I give up a job I really enjoy.

      --
      Take note, take note, O world,

      To be direct and honest is not safe.

    36. Re:Canada vs. USA by renehollan · · Score: 1
      I live in Monroe, WA.

      We had a lovelier day on Saturday (Nov. 26, 2005 -- your "today").

      --
      You could've hired me.
    37. Re:Canada vs. USA by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but you moving to Canada will not change your family.

    38. Re:Canada vs. USA by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      The potholes are where the gold used to be. That city got jacked!

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  38. Re:Skilled workers? by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 1

    I bet they will be trying to repatriate Pamela Anderson, though. I've seen some home movies demonstrating just how skilled she is (acting abilities notwithstanding).

    --
    If you can read this sig, you're too close.
  39. It's like Operating Systems! by Man+in+Spandex · · Score: 1

    If American citizens are frustrated and annoyed with their government's behavior, can someone please explain how expatriating will do anything but make the problem worse?

    That's like saying If Windows users are frustrated and annoyed with the viruses/trojans/crash that they get, can someone please explain how moving to OS-X will do any good?

    **runs away from OSX Zealots** :X

    1. Re:It's like Operating Systems! by CyberLife · · Score: 1

      That's a very good analogy, and it reminds me of a book I read many years back. It was suggesting that people view governments as service providers, and to treat them the same as any other kind of vendor. If you're dissatisfied with the level of service you're getting, find someone else that will give you what you want. We expect to have that option in business. Why should government be any different? They are, after all, doing nothing more than providing various forms of protection services (financial, physical, etc.) in exchange for our taxes.

    2. Re:It's like Operating Systems! by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      The analogy is good, but the cost is very different. If you buy a Mac and decide it sux, you're out a couple thousand. If you uproot your entire life to move to another country and it sux, you're screwed!

      Also, there's a question of whether it's any better. There might be some areas where Canada is better than the US, and other areas where it's worse, perhaps disasterously so.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  40. Skilled Workers credentials fallout by tv+war · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The attracting of skilled workers to Canada is a bit of a scam. It turns out the only credentials which "count" in practice are ones mainly of Canadian and/or American sources. Sometimes credentials of British, Australian or Western European sources may get by. Otherwise you're shit out of luck. Many folks with credentials from other places, are relegated to working at McDonalds or other minimum wage type jobs. Some are willing to tough it out by going back to school to get Canadian approved credentials.

    Main reason why immigration to Canada isn't very popular for "skilled workers" is because it's harder to find work in comparison to the United States. If you don't have Canadian and/or American experience and credentials, most employers will just delete your resume.

    I highly discourage any skilled workers from immigrating to Canada, unless you're willing to work blue collar jobs and/or are willing to go back to school to get Canadian approved credentials.

    Attracting "skilled" foreign workers and then relegating them to blue collar or minimum wage jobs is largely a waste of resources and time.

    1. Re:Skilled Workers credentials fallout by JacobO · · Score: 1

      I would just like to add that I moved to Canada from New Zealand into skilled work. The employer was a little cautious at first, I did not disappoint.

      So it is possible, but I suspect being a white English speaker helped a whole lot. (Perhaps in Quebec being a white francophone would be more useful, but I'm only speculating.)

    2. Re:Skilled Workers credentials fallout by lucm · · Score: 1
      If you don't have Canadian and/or American experience and credentials, most employers will just delete your resume

      Suppose that you are a Canadian employer and you have to hire a new systems administrator. If you want to hire a foreign worker, would you choose someone with a PHD from the University of Ouagadougou (http://www.univ-ouaga.bf/) or someone with a bachelor degree from the Wichita State University (http://www.wichita.edu?

      There are two challenges with the candidate from Burkina Faso. First the employer must find a way to confirm that he studied at the Ouagadougou University. Then he has to find reliable metrics to validate the quality of the education.

      On the other hand, there is none of these issues with the candidate from WSU.

      So if the WSU candidate is ok, why bother? What added value would an employer get from the other candidate? Cultural insight?

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    3. Re:Skilled Workers credentials fallout by Chemical+Serenity · · Score: 1

      A sadly good point.

      One thing that could help resolve some of these issues is if immigration canada could take some time and evaluate foreign accreditations better than they currently do. Help solve the woeful issue of emergency room doctors from senegal driving cabs for years waiting for equivalency to practice over here, for sure.

      --
      "People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
  41. Hockey. 'Nuff said. by Russ+Nelson · · Score: 1

    Hockey. 'Nuff said.

    --
    Don't piss off The Angry Economist
  42. Could be nice by Graham1982 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I was born in Michigan, and travelled to Canada a few times for brief roadtrips while I was a child. Keep in mind that Canada is not Antarctica, it is not a frozen wasteland the whole year round. You cannot just drive there and say, "okay, where is my citizenship?" though. You have to file with the Canadian Government first, wait a while, and also pay something like $3,000 USD I believe. One thing is for sure, the Canadians have an awesome healthcare system. Yes, it is also true that they don't have nearly as much crime either.

    So why am I not yet living there myself? I am just too lazy to leave for now. Also, I wonder if enough Americans moved there, would we eventually mess the place up and make it an extention of our own country? Ohwell, to fully grasp the reality of this subject, I think you would need the experiance of being a resident both in the United States and in Canada. Even then, keep in mind that not all of the United States is alike, certainly different places in Canada must have some sort of social/economical distinctions from other places. Okay, I think this post is long enough now, I will stop here.

    1. Re:Could be nice by ninja_assault_kitten · · Score: 1

      Speaking as a Canadian who's living in the US, what you get in healthcare you pay for in taxes. Additionally, salaries for higher level tech positions are much higher in the US. That's the main reason I left 10 years ago. That and Edmonton isn't exactly cosmopolitan.

    2. Re:Could be nice by Graham1982 · · Score: 1

      What about contrasts in the wages of other professions? Are most jobs paying lower wages than that of their American counterparts? I am just curious as tech is not my current priority as a career. Thanks for your previous input, that does change my perception a little.

  43. Canada Sucks. by nblender · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm a Canadian. You Merkans would hate it here. This place sucks. Don't come here. We regularly eat children and stab puppies for sport. It's cold and everyone has a dog-sled. This is a horrible purgatory. I beg of you, please don't come here.

    1. Re:Canada Sucks. by petabyte · · Score: 2, Funny

      I'm a Canadian. You Merkans would hate it here. This place sucks. Don't come here. We regularly eat children and stab puppies for sport. It's cold and everyone has a dog-sled. This is a horrible purgatory. I beg of you, please don't come here.

      And not a single "eh" in there at all. Like we'd believe you're a Canadian! ;)

    2. Re:Canada Sucks. by tv+war · · Score: 1

      Almost any country or town will start to "suck" if you live there long enough.

    3. Re:Canada Sucks. by Ummu · · Score: 1

      We don't have paved roads. We also suffer from periodic cannibal tribe attacks.

    4. Re:Canada Sucks. by smchris · · Score: 1

      I'm a Canadian. You Merkans would hate it here. This place sucks. Don't come here. We regularly eat children and stab puppies for sport. It's cold and everyone has a dog-sled. This is a horrible purgatory. I beg of you, please don't come here.

      So it's different than North Dakota how?

    5. Re:Canada Sucks. by tomhudson · · Score: 1
      Pp>
      So it's different than North Dakota how?

      Well, for starters, Celine Dion is on YOUR side of the border now, and the Canadian Border Patrol has been ordered to "poutine" her to death if she tries to get back into Kanuckistan.

      Plus, we've got better beer.

  44. Re:No philosophy degree required by blkmage · · Score: 1

    And I LOVE snow!!! It's better than SMOG!!!

    You'll get plenty of both here.
  45. Shaddup! Sick of the MRI story. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The MRI thing is a myth. I work at University Health Network. At the Princess Margaret Hospital, the MRI staff works in two 10-hour shifts. The delay is for people who do not want to go in before 9am or after 6pm. My mother had to have one and she was booked for 8pm appointment merely four days later! Yes, convenience is great, but sometimes is not an option.

    But then again, outside Toronto it may be a different story.

  46. $700,000,000 CDN, eh? by mickyflynn · · Score: 1

    no offense, but what is a $3.50USD programme going to do to help anything?

    1. Re:$700,000,000 CDN, eh? by yabos · · Score: 1

      That's funny. I also think it's funny when I buy something on eBay for $25USD and I have to pay $30 CAD.

    2. Re:$700,000,000 CDN, eh? by udowish · · Score: 1

      Hum, I think you need to look at the American Pasco. you know, the green back who's ink is now worth more than the bill itself. It was only two decades ago the CDN buck was 1.07US, and it looks like those days are coming back

      --
      when in doubt press enter and we'll figure it out later..
    3. Re:$700,000,000 CDN, eh? by mickyflynn · · Score: 1

      let me still feel good about life while i still can? I know that America is dying, that my generation (born in 1984) is the last one that's going to know anything at all about liberty, and even then, we didn't have much. I love my country, but I hate my government. fuck the damned patriot act, i'll say it right out in the open and i'll die for it if i have to. it's disgraceful, but short of an IRA-style bombing campaign, there isn't a lot we can do.

    4. Re:$700,000,000 CDN, eh? by DeeKayWon · · Score: 1

      It's official. That joke is so old and tired, not even Slashdot moderators think it's funny anymore.

    5. Re:$700,000,000 CDN, eh? by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      You managed to fuck your dollar. Sorry man, it's only 15% less these days.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    6. Re:$700,000,000 CDN, eh? by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      The patriot act is a tiny piece of a huge puzzle of ineptitude. Pay off any debts you have, because the next decade is going to show a massive increase in the cost of consumer debt, as the credit bubble finally bursts. By 2015, the USA will not be the same power it is today, I'm positive.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    7. Re:$700,000,000 CDN, eh? by mickyflynn · · Score: 1

      by 2015 we'll be so over-run with mexican'ts that we'll be as filthy, important, and lawless as Mexico is now. Of course we won't have any power.

  47. Re:To become a real Canadian... by PygmySurfer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Don't kick the baby...

  48. What good is the 'best' health care system... by paranode · · Score: 1
    When you don't have the best health care?

    Don't take it personal though, eh?

  49. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by Just+Another+Poster · · Score: 1
    Better economy?? The Toronto Stock Exchange index is up 20% so far this year

    Toronto Stock Exchange?

    What's that?

  50. Compare that to here (the UK) by hug_the_penguin · · Score: 1

    It seems a reasonably fair system. Canada seems to be keen to embrace skilled professionals, an area perhaps where other countries are lacking. One of the key things to see is that the UK (where i am) seems to let just about everybody through, so you take the bad with the good. In the US of course, only the cream of the professional crop make it, and some of them don't. If you don't know people there, you're screwed. With the canadian system as described it seems they manage to get the good without the bad.

    --
    ~HTP~ Hug that tux ;)
    1. Re:Compare that to here (the UK) by EvilMagnus · · Score: 1

      The UK system, on paper, lies somewhere between the US and Canada. Like the US, you usually must already have a job offer before arriving in-country, and you must apply for (and be granted) the appropriate visa, which is non-trivial but possible with a lawyer. You also, supposedly, must prove that the job isn't taking away from a native. The UK does have 'work-holiday' visas for Commonwealth citizens that lets folks come and work in bars and the like for up to 6 months (lots of Australians do this) which are frequently used to extend stays. The area where the UK differs from the US is it's easier to enter the country then 'go grey' while still claiming benefits from the state. Witness the slightly-xenophobic complaints about asylum seekers... and the ease with which asylum seekers can get into the country and become de-facto residents through inertia and government/EU regulations.

      --
      -EvilMagnus
    2. Re:Compare that to here (the UK) by Maxwell · · Score: 1

      You dont need a job offer to move to the UK. It's like Canada, you collect 'points' with education, work experience, languages, etc. If you have enough points you are in and can THEN look for work. That's a year, renewable visa. I know this because if you get an MBA from one of their self-defined 'top 40 MBA' programs you automatically are granted all the points you need. I happen to be getting my MBA at one of those schools in Canada...would not mind spending a few years there, as I already did 7 years in the US.

      JON

    3. Re:Compare that to here (the UK) by Malc · · Score: 1

      I think the key is the number of people that Canada is trying to let in. Both Canada and UK have a certain number of family class immigrants - people sponsored by their families that are already present in the country. That adds up to a certain amount. Beyond that is Canada's active immigration policy. They want to allow in 300,000 immigrants per year (~1% of the population). Can you imagine having that number of people coming in to the UK? Where would they all go? There's no space left, unless you want to repopulate the Highlands and destroy the remaining spots of beauty. Unfortunately allowing in highly skilled immigrants doesn't guarantee them employment - the number of doctors working as janitors in Canada attests to this.

  51. Income tax misnomer by Chemical+Serenity · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Turns out, income taxes for median incomes (roughly CAD$52k in the US per household, roughly CAD$56k in Canada per household) are more or less equivalent dependant on province vs. state. You'd be better off anywhere in Canada than, say, Texas. If you make 60k or less, you'll probably pay less tax in Canada. If you make 60k or more, you'll pay more. Particularly if you're a landowner... Canada doesn't give big tax breaks for land ownership, which is unfortunate... but you can get a significant portion of dividend income tax free, so if you're getting started in the investor class, you've got some advantages.

    GST does make things more expensive, but cost of living varies so widely based on region both in Canada and the US that it's essentially useless to make comparisons.

    --
    "People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
    1. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 4, Informative
      I'll have to followup later, but, having been born in Canada, and lived in Texas, I can assure you that it is much cheaper in Texas, tax-wise. Property is dirt cheap, though property taxes and insurance can be high (the property taxes generally pay for great schools, at least they did in Allen). There is not state income tax.

      At just about any income level, a family with a single income, filing jointly, and owning their home will be much better off just about anywhere in the U.S. compared to Canada: there is no deduction for morgtage interest for non-investment property in Canada, and couples with a single income can't file jointly (and the spousal credit is mediocre, about CA$7-8k at the *lowest* marginal tax rate taken off your gross tax burden).

      I once figured out that for marrieds, taxes in the U.S., in a no-income tax state, are generally lower once income goes above $US15k.

      It's the main reason we left Canada for the U.S. -- we could not afford to live in Canada anymore with the high taxes, and mediocre health care (free, perhaps, but non-existent for the most part).

      --
      You could've hired me.
    2. Re:Income tax misnomer by cass1010 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This dude is drunk. I moved from Calgary to Dallas 5 years ago and pay way less in taxes now than I did in Canada.

    3. Re:Income tax misnomer by Catbeller · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "there is no deduction for morgtage interest for non-investment property in Canada"

      The Republican necons in our Congress are trying to remove the mortgage interest deduction as we speak. Now how does the US look if that's gone?

    4. Re:Income tax misnomer by jellybear · · Score: 1

      This dude is sober. And Calgary, Alberta is way better than Ontario or Quebec.

    5. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I once figured out that for marrieds, taxes in the U.S., in a no-income tax state, are generally lower once income goes above $US15k.

      You did, of course, not being a disingenious shill, include the $200-600 (depending on employment type/other factors) a month health insurance per-person in the household in the US equation, right? Right?

    6. Re:Income tax misnomer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well, at least after Kathrina we know why taxes are higher in countries that actually care for providing services to all their citizes. I can live with that.

    7. Re:Income tax misnomer by Jetson · · Score: 3, Informative
      there is no deduction for morgtage interest for non-investment property in Canada

      There's also no taxes owing for capital gains when you sell that non-investment property. My house in Vancouver, BC has gone up in value by more than $125,000 in the last 3 years. Given a choice between a 17% deduction on the interest portion of my mortgage versus $125,000 in tax-free cash I think I'll take the latter....

    8. Re:Income tax misnomer by CodeBuster · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This is not as significant as you might believe. The vast majority of working age Americans and their families, those with health coverage, are covered by an umbrella policy through their employer and this benefit is not included as part of their taxable income. It is sort of like having 200-600 tax free dollars which must be used to purchase health care, but in this case the employer buys it for you instead of giving you the cash. The remaining people are either 65 and older and fall under MediCare or MedicAid (i.e. the Government pays for their coverage), they have their own private insurance (in which case the $200 - $600 dollar figure applies) because they are self employed or chose to have their own private coverage, or they have no insurance at all (an extremely risky proposition if you ask me). Those of us, including myself who pay for private insurance are statistically insignificant compared to those on employer sponsored group plans so for the average US household there is not an extra $200-$600 dollars per person per month being paid out of disposable household income for health coverage. In other words both systems are third-party pay, but in Canada its the government through higher taxes and in the US it is mostly the employers. The more efficient system is debatable, but actually neither of these systems is the most desirable. The economist Milton Friedman wrote an excellent paper on how to fix the healthcare system in America and he considers many other systems alongside our own including the Canadian and European systems.

      How to Cure Health Care

    9. Re:Income tax misnomer by Ragingguppy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Funny you should say that health care is non-existent in Canada. Because Canadians pay less per capita for health care then the people in the US. Americans pay 14% of GDP and don't cover everyone. Just the rich and those with corporate health plans can afford it. While in Canada we pay 12% GDP and everyone is covered on our health plan. Regardless of who you are and what you do for a living.

      Non-Existent is an exageration. Thats what the ultra right wing fasists will have you believe so that they can consider installing a two tierd health care system.

      As for affording to live in Canada. I don't believe its the taxes that are difficult to live with. Its the lack of work. Lets face it there are more opportunities in the US. Canadian companies are pansies and won't take a chance on someone if they have no experience. Have you looked at what the requirements are in Canada for working in the computer science field. I can safeley say that most job postings are unrealistic when it comes to the job requirements. But thats what Free trade got us companies moving down to the US because they don't want to pay into a public health care system even though they pay less.

      Free trade is the problem not the high taxes. Since free trade came in Corporate Canada has been completely gutted. Even the Hudsons Bay Company is subject to an American take over bid. A 300 Year old company. Its been around longer then when IBM was selling Cheese Slicers. Yet its subject to a takeover bid. Thats just not right.

      I remember when Free trade first came in to Canada. I personally witnessed a 20 year old company go out of business within a few months of an American big box store come in to the market in Vancouver. That big box store was Home Depot. They drove out a smaller company that served the Greater Vancouver area well for more then 20 years. And the list doesn't stop there. Eatons was purchased by Sears, Woodwards went out of business all together, and McMillan Blodel was bought up by Wearhouser. McMillan Blodel was the biggest logging company in Canada and one of the biggest in the world. That gives you an Idea of the negative impact free trade has had on Canada. The taxes are manageable. They'd be manageable if it wasn't for outside presures. Personally I hope our prime minister follows up on his threats and dumps the North American Free Trade Agreement. That would be the best thing that has ever happened to Canada.

    10. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It is sort of like having 200-600 tax free dollars which must be used to purchase health care, but in this case the employer buys it for you instead of giving you the cash

      Except this is unlikely to be the case in the situation the parent described. The employers are doing their darnest to get out of paying these "benefits" and change work designations to "part-time" or "temporary" or "contract" work to avoid paying them on ever expanding basis. Most people employed in the only area of job expansion in the US - the burger flipping. Wal-Mart and other "service" industries do not have any such benefits. Even many well to do places, such as Microsoft do that. It is a very common scenario amongst IT workers, who are treated as "consultants". Add to this the fact that if forced to, the employers will opt for cheapest insurance with the lowest coverage and highest deductible possible. To compare this situation to Canada and claim that taxation in the US is "lesser" is ridiculous, even if one does not take into account the miriad of other programs offered by the Canadian and Provincial Governments. It is comparing apples to oranges. The US "take home" pay is "greater" simply because the people who take it home are expected to pay much more dearly for these, largely unaffordable to them, services. The fact that there is 40 million of completely medically uninsured US citizens speaks for itself far louder then any self-centered, greedy shill on Slashdot can. What bothers me about the parent is that I fully expect him to crawl back here as soon as he gets into any medical trouble over there. For the likes of him, all of his profits are "private" and exclusively of his own making and all of the losses and help to him are, naturally, an obligation of the Canadian society. I know that kind of a cockroach all to well.

      In other words both systems are third-party pay, but in Canada its the government through higher taxes and in the US it is mostly the employers.

      That is untrue. Some industries, mostly old-style and going away manufacturing ones, used to provide generous benefits. Such benefits are today restricted mostly to the CEO class. In this "comparison" the Canadian system is the only one which is "third-party" as in the US the coverage is abysmal and it could be more accurately described "third-party for CEOs and the wealthy, everyone-for-himself-party former middle class and no-party for the poor" system.

      The economist Milton Friedman wrote an excellent paper on how to fix the healthcare system in America and he considers many other systems alongside our own including the Canadian and European systems.

      That man is a total loon. In his scenario, the coverage for the many Americans would be restricted to the "catastrophic" insurance only, which in the long term is much more expensive as the low income (most populous group and increasing) would avoid using high-deductible medical services until their situation got so desperate as to qualify for "catastrophic" coverage. Such a system promotes use of the "catastrophic", emergency services by discouraging the pre-emptive, lower cost ones. It would result in continuation mad profit taking and little change amongst the insurance leeches who would benefit enormously from the fact that they no longer have to worry about the most expensive and money loosing procedures, for which the taxpayer would pay instead. In other words, it is socialism for the insurance companies. All the profits remain private and in place for regular medical service coverage and the greatest potential losses are socialized. I would expect such as system to prove far more expensive as a whole then the current one (but far more profitable for the insurance companies), even though it would provide at least the catastrophic insurance to all citizens. A typical plan by the kind of a "thinker" Freedman is. An economist my ass.

    11. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1

      P.S. Sorry for the bad typos (loosing? ugh) and missing letters/words. It is really late here.

    12. Re:Income tax misnomer by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 2, Informative

      You get a tax free sale once per 2 years of your personal residence in the U.S. My house has doubled in 5 years, could double again, and double again and I still wouldn't owe any taxes when I sold it.

      The mortgage deduction really doesn't kick in unless your mortgage is about $100k (so say a $120k house with 24k down)and up because of the "standard" deduction.

      The mortgage deduction is really a subsidy for rich people who are buying million dollar houses and getting 2 grand a month off their taxes. The "fair tax" people are trying to lower that to the average house price in a given market- so about $200k Texas and $450k Calif and New York.

      As far as unlimited nationalized health care, I think it is unsustainable. However, I would strongly support a national health care that was about 1,000 times the minimum wage (about $5k). This would cover about 95% of what could go wrong to most people (since auto wrecks are covered by auto insurance and so on for other ways you get injured). It would -not- cover cancer, rare diseases, etc. I think catastropic health care should be covered like it is now. It sounds heartless but we just can't afford to heal everyone- I look at Oregon as a model. And I say that as a cancer survivor who had some heavy bills.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    13. Re:Income tax misnomer by sadler121 · · Score: 1

      Where talking Alberta here, the one province that is ususualy lumped into Jesusland because of the insande amount of fundy christians. If your going to live in Alberta you might as well live in the USA.

    14. Re:Income tax misnomer by cass1010 · · Score: 1

      I moved from Alberta to Dallas. I definitely paid more taxes in Alberta than in Texas and I never even met a fundamentalist christian while growing up there. The mormons have a couple of large churchs in southern AB but that's it. In Dallas there are many mega churches and alot of the people I meet, including IT workers, are very involved in thier church community.

    15. Re:Income tax misnomer by Shajenko42 · · Score: 1
      As for affording to live in Canada. I don't believe its the taxes that are difficult to live with. Its the lack of work. Lets face it there are more opportunities in the US. Canadian companies are pansies and won't take a chance on someone if they have no experience. Have you looked at what the requirements are in Canada for working in the computer science field. I can safeley say that most job postings are unrealistic when it comes to the job requirements.
      I'm in the US and haven't noticed any difference on this count.
    16. Re:Income tax misnomer by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Except this is unlikely to be the case in the situation the parent described.

      Nope. 80% of Americans get their health insurance paid for by their employers. It is in fact very likely.

      Most people employed in the only area of job expansion in the US - the burger flipping.

      Nope. Here are the fastest growing ocupations in the US over the past 10 years:

      Health aides 138%
      Human service workers 136%
      Personal and home care aids 130%
      Computer engineers and scientists 112%
      Systems analysts 110%
      Physical and corrective therapy assistants and aides 93%
      Physical therapists 88%
      Paralegals 86%
      Teachers, special education 74%
      Medical assistants 71%

      In general the top categories are in health care. It seems to me that a nation with the terrible health care problems you claim would not be adding health care workers at that rate.

      Wal-Mart and other "service" industries do not have any such benefits

      Wal-Mart does in fact offer health covereage to it's workers. The problem here is that their pay rate is so low that about half of them decline coverage.

      Such benefits are today restricted mostly to the CEO class.

      Utter nonsense. My insurance coverage, which I pay $25 a month for includes 100% hospital coverage, free prescriptions and $5 a visit copay to the doctor. Two years ago I needed an MRI for an ankle injury and was able to get an appointment in 3 days. Out of pocket cost was $0. I am definitely NOT a CEO class person.

      An economist my ass.

      A Nobel Prize winning economicist, actually.

      It seems to me that you are living in some sort of weird fantasy world not connected in any way to what the reality is.

    17. Re:Income tax misnomer by Malc · · Score: 1

      I'm a Briton who lived in the US, and now settled in Canada. Taxes aren't as bad as you make out. Lower income earners in Canada have very low incomes taxes to pay, although it quickly ramps up as income rises. However, I don't find I hurt as much as you would expect. When I look back at my taxes in the US, it was all broken out making each bit look smaller. But when you add up federal, state, municipal and health care contributions, the tax rate quickly approaches what I pay in Canada. Taxes are easier in Canada - I just fill out one form for the lot.

      Sales taxes in Canada vary, with Albertans only paying federal sales taxes. Sales taxes in the US also vary, and are relatively high in places, although not on European levels. The thing is though, I feel like I get better value for my money here. My taxes go on things that make a different to my life, not on guns and waging unnecessary and unwanted wars. When I moved north of the border, I felt a weight lift of my shoulders: no more did I have to worry about health care. No longer was I trapped in my job because of health care. Don't forget, most Americans are one serious illness away from bankruptcy (sp?). I say no thanks to that. I'd rather pay a little more in taxes and get something real in return, and also know that my neighbours are being taken care of too.

    18. Re:Income tax misnomer by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      Healthcare you pay for optionally, where you can actually _receieve_ healthcare?

      How un-Canadian.

      --
      resigned
    19. Re:Income tax misnomer by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that you are living in some sort of weird fantasy world not connected in any way to what the reality is.

      He probably reads Noam Chomsky each night before going to sleep.

      --
      resigned
    20. Re:Income tax misnomer by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      Well, I suppose it would suck to live there if you wanted to run a neo-Pagan bookstore or something.

      But, wait! I live right in the heart of 'Jesusland' and yet was able to pick up a whole box of books, including Regardie's Golden Dawn two volume set, at an auction, for five bucks. Nobody has been waving crosses in my face since doing so, nor do I get the sense I'm being followed.

      I guess they're more subtle than that. Lord knows the stereotypes about this region _must_ be true.

      --
      resigned
    21. Re:Income tax misnomer by Malc · · Score: 1

      I don't buy this argument about mortgages being deductible. I think all that it will result in is higher house prices. It's a "feel good" illusion.

    22. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Yes, still cheaper. Much. Furthermore, the proposed removal of mortgage-interest deductability is to be phased in at high-levels of deductability. The primary opposition comes from States where a middle-class home can cost $1,000,000 (some parts of California).

      In my case, it amounts to about some $10,000 a year that would be subject to federal income tax (it is already subject to social security and medicare taxes). In a 25% tax bracket, that would be $2500, or a little over $100 a pay.

      Now, I have arranged my affairs to be tax-efficient, and my federal marginal tax rate is only 15%, though adding another $10k of income would push some of that to be taxed at 25%, so the effect on my would be around $1800 a year of extra taxes. Still, much cheaper, mostly because my wife and I can file jointly in the U.S. and can not in Canada.

      No doubt, some will notice that 25% marginal tax rate, and note that Canadian federal rates don't get that high for middle-class income earners. However, that 25% rate arises at a much higher level of income in the U.S., and when filing jointly, it arises higher still.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    23. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Funny, my father was told he needed an AAA repair, and after 40 years of paying top dollar taxes, was also told it was too expensive, there were no doctors to perform it in Canada. That was a death sentence. He did not have the resources to go to the U.S. for the surgery, what with all the health care taxes he paid.

      I've read that access to surgery often depends on who one knows -- a relative of mine has been waiting close to four years for a hip replacement. I suppose I could ask who your mother had to blow to get that hip for dear old dad, but that would be crass.

      While living in Whitby, ON, we could not even find a doctor that was seeing new patients. Furthermore, the Ontario health insurance application requires one to agree to live in the province permanently. I would never restrict mine, or my family's movements like that. I can understand a waiting period, and minimum residency requirement, to avoid having to provide care to transients, but "permanently"? WTF?

      --
      You could've hired me.
    24. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      You did, of course, not being a disingenious shill, include the $200-600

      Actually, yes. I had a complex spreadsheet trying to be as balanced as possible.

      In my case, the cost of our health coverage is more like $1200 a month, but my employer covers all of it, and it's for far better care than I can get in Canada -- much of what it covers is not covered by provincial health care programs.

      Even then, it's still cheaper. The big thing is being able to file jointly.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    25. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      However, I would strongly support a national health care that was about 1,000 times the minimum wage (about $5k).

      Indeed. I think most would suppor that.

      Canada is the only country in the world with universal health care -- other socialist nations with national health care have "two tier" systems -- basic care "for free" and additional care for which one can purchace private insurance.

      However, in Canada, the mantra is that it is unfair that "the rich" can purchase better health care than the not so rich. So much so, that it is illegal for a Canadian citizen to purchase (and a doctor sell) health care services that are "covered" -- even if one has to wait in pain for that covered service.

      A recent court decision in Quebec struck down that provision of the Quebec Health Care act (the provinces administer their own health care plans under control of the federal government) as unconstitutional, but because the Canadian constitution has a "notwithstanding clause", the government can overrule the Supreme Court of Canada. Effectively, "Here are your rights unless we say so". I dunno if the politicos are more evil for pulling that stunt, or the electorate is more stupid for accepting it.

      As you note, this is unsustainable.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    26. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Canadian companies are pansies and won't take a chance on someone

      Perhaps Canadian companies can't afford the payroll taxes.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    27. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      I;d be inclined to agree, except that I find housing more affordable in the U.S. than in Canada, for comparable neighborhoods.

      The mortgate interest deduction doesn't matter all that much, since it's only available if you don't take the standard deduction (you have to pick either a standard or itemized deductions).

      --
      You could've hired me.
    28. Re:Income tax misnomer by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      That man is a total loon. In his scenario, the coverage for the many Americans would be restricted to the "catastrophic" insurance only, which in the long term is much more expensive as the low income (most populous group and increasing) would avoid using high-deductible medical services until their situation got so desperate as to qualify for "catastrophic" coverage

      Did you read the article before making this statement? First off it is extremely rude to refer to a Nobel Laureate and PhD economist as a loon, although he has been demonized by left wing crackpots, such as yourself, for helping poor countries improve their economic situations. The idea that people will wait until they are almost dead to seek care under a high deductible system is absurd. Do you wait until your car engine has a catastrophic failure before you get the oil changed? Of course not so why should it be any different with your body? If people would go for yearly physical exams, see their dentist at least twice per year, and exercise instead of being obese couch potatoes then they would not have to worry about most preventable causes of illness and other medical emergencies. I am tired of hearing people with $100 tennis shoes, $300 dollar cell phones, and designer clothing complain about how they cannot afford to pay out of pocket for their basic medical care. They should try saving their money instead of living above their means. I also tired of being modded down by people who want to pretend that their Noam Chomsky view of the way the world should be is inherently superior to any other viewpoint when experience has shown time and again that wishful socialist thinking leads inevitably to the distribution of poverty and not wealth. Take your cool-aid and drink it someplace else, sir.

    29. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Nope. 80% of Americans get their health insurance paid for by their employers. It is in fact very likely.

      Source?

      Health aides 138% Human service workers 136% Personal and home care aids 130% Computer engineers and scientists 112% Systems analysts 110% Physical and corrective therapy assistants and aides 93% Physical therapists 88% Paralegals 86% Teachers, special education 74% Medical assistants 71%

      Most of these are service, part-time, contract or self-employed (i.e. "consultants") "workers". Explain to me again how is it that the employer pays their insurance?

      Wal-Mart does in fact offer health covereage to it's workers. The problem here is that their pay rate is so low that about half of them decline coverage.

      Oh yes! That makes all the difference! Phew! The end result is so completely different! Why, if Wal-Mart did not provide any coverage, that would be, like, they would have no coverage. As opposed to having no coverage. I am so glad that we have this clarified.

      My insurance coverage, which I pay $25 a month for includes 100% hospital coverage, free prescriptions and $5 a visit copay to the doctor. Two years ago I needed an MRI for an ankle injury and was able to get an appointment in 3 days. Out of pocket cost was $0. I am definitely NOT a CEO class person.

      Let me put you in touch with these people then (read all the comments from your fellow Americans). Enlighten them as to your wonderful insurance company. It seems they sure need it.

      A Nobel Prize winning economicist, actually.

      It seems to me that you are living in some sort of weird fantasy world not connected in any way to what the reality is.

      That's the way to prove your grasp on reality! Nobel Prise winning economcists [sic!] are always guaranteed to be experts in everything. Like national medical care. Even if economics itself is considered "science" only by other economists (sort of like psychiatry). And the top Nobel Prize winning economists never get together to apply their "theories" to practice by forming world's most famous and largest hedge funds, which never, I mean never would fail completely and spectacularly to the tune of many billions of dollars, having the said geniuses scatter all over with their tails between their legs. It could never happen! They also never have agendas, oh no! Even if their theories have obvious, easily noticeable holes you could drive trucks through. But what counts for "reality" is only the things which agree with your ideology. Reality my ass.

    30. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      He probably reads Noam Chomsky each night before going to sleep.

      Last time I read Chomsky was when I was dabbling in Natural Language Processing. As to the rest of your vigorous dittohead nodding to the parent's falsities, see my reply to him.

    31. Re:Income tax misnomer by spyfrog · · Score: 1

      Canada is the only country in the world?? Almost all of Europe has a system that provides universial health care! Even Great Britain, which is the most US like country in Europe.

    32. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Indeed.

      Not so. The parent is spinning, which I pointed out in my reply.

      Many Canadians I've met can not understand how the U.S. can function at all without universal healthcare. But, function it does.

      That depends on your definition of "function".

      But, when one looks deeper, one sees that the percentage of the population in the worst case scenario is (a) actually quite small and (b) there is opportunity to move out of poverty.

      What is (a) the number then and (b) I have the "opportunity" to become the King of Monaco, if only I were to hang around in the right places to meet the princess and get hitched, no? It could happen, really! The odds are even similar as for some of those people "moving out of poverty". What the fuck does "opportunity" to "move out of poverty" mean? What counts is that they, at present, not in your hypotetical, coulda-woulda-shoulda America, have no coverage. Or is this too complicated?

      In contrast, Canada's "social safety net" is, for many, an illusion. Rather like a lottery: everybody knows of someone who won, but the chances of doing so are quite slim.

      I have first-hand experience. Many who post on Slashdot do too. You are just a lying, greedy dork with an agenda, that's all.

      We have, went through boom and bust, having to return to Canada for a while (always staying in legal status), and are now back.

      That fuck says it all about you. Do not come back here you fucking leech! You've abandoned this country, you are opposed to what it stands for, you pay your taxes to another and obviously have greater allegiance to another so stay the fuck out!. You whine about how wonderful it is to make profits on the backs of some poor idiots in the States and then, when some shit hits the fan, to crawl back here to take advantage of the social safety net which the rest of us are building for ourselves. The same one you are dissing whenever it is inconvenient for your pocket book at other times. What a fucking cockroach!

      Heck, my son is an American citizen, and the rest of us hope to be soon, as well.

      Good riddance. And stay out.

      There is poverty everywhere. I happen to like that I can donate substantial funds a month to the local food bank (generally more around the holidays) rather than have some fat-ass politoco tax that money from me "for the poor on welfare (after expenses of course -- mmmm, leather chair, mmm".

      Sure and they get to eat whenever the bank happens to have some food, i.e. whenever you and other economic-rape artists feel pangs of conscience. Every second July or so.

    33. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Healthcare you pay for optionally, where you can actually _receieve_ healthcare?

      What the fuck are you talking about? I, as all Canadians, receive my healthcare whenever I need it. As I have on multiple occasions, with two (one quite lengthy) hospital says. The parent poster did too, as he himself admitted when he was "down on luck" in the States. But now he is back on a roll and getting fat and rich and therefore anything that event faintly resembles txation "robs" him of his "fair and square gotten loot" and is to be destroyed. Like some other people's medical coverage in another country he no longer lives in and pisses on as a sport, which is his way of saying "thanks" for saving his ass.

    34. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 3, Interesting
      n my case, the cost of our health coverage is more like $1200 a month, but my employer covers all of it,

      There are not many people like you there statistically. You are an elite exception. Also a huge, $1200 a month, tax on an employer is supposedly somehow better then personal taxation how again?

      and it's for far better care than I can get in Canada -

      And that would be how precisely? Blow jobs by nurses? 1400 square feet bed-rooms with French maids? What?

      much of what it covers is not covered by provincial health care programs.

      Ouija boards or Chinese Astrological Brick To The Head Therapy I presume?

      Even then, it's still cheaper

      $1200 a month is cheaper? Does it cover whatever that thing is you are smoking right now too?

    35. Re:Income tax misnomer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Nope. 80% of Americans get their health insurance paid for by their employers. It is in fact very likely.

      Really? Statistics I have heard are much lower. Can you cite your source(s)?

      Obviously there is also vagueness WRT whether you are talking about 80% of total american population, or 80% of population that has health coverage (latter is rather misleading if you were using that one). Latest numbers for percentage of americans that do have any health insurance was well below 80% (yes, I need to Google for exact figure and link...).

      And yes, employers are doing their hardest to try to get out of having to pay for the insurance. Pre-tax or not, costs are enormous -- US is using twice as much money per capita for health care, and getting mediocre at best results overall. Read ANY international study on the subject; or, for easier reading (but still accurate), go to Scientific American web site and browse about any issue, they have multiple articles each year on this very subject.

      My personal comparison between a scandinavian country and US (in 2 states during past 5 years) leads me to believe universal health care is hands down better value for money; even though my personal health care is superior in US system (I have 6 figure salary from a big company -- I feel almost guilty for level of benefits I and my family get, compared to workers).

      Oh, and as to your insurance -- sure, you are obviusly a single guy. 25$ is possible, then. For families out-of-pocket expenses start with, say, 200$/month, for GOOD companies, and need to add one more digit for low-wage companies (if they have any plans available at all). Your situation is hardly representative of general population.

    36. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Did you read the article before making this statement? First off it is extremely rude to refer to a Nobel Laureate and PhD economist as a loon, although he has been demonized by left wing crackpots, such as yourself, for helping poor countries improve their economic situations.

      No I refer to him as a loon because of what he proposed. Also, being a Nobel Prize winning economist is not exactly an automatic endorsement, afer the antics some of the "top" ones have perpetrated in not so distant past. Finally, economy is not exactly "science" and only seen as such by other economists (and various related greed mongers).

      The idea that people will wait until they are almost dead to seek care under a high deductible system is absurd.

      It is not only not absurd, it is the situation at present. Most of the uninsured seek attention at Emergency Rooms only after "home remedies" and other desperate measures failed. This is one of the reasons of the severe overcrowding of the ER services in public hospitals.

      Do you wait until your car engine has a catastrophic failure before you get the oil changed?

      If you have no money for the oil change you have only two options: do not drive (or live in this case) or keep on driving, hoping for the best (and pray furiously, given that most poor are very religious).

      Of course not so why should it be any different with your body?

      No money means no money. It does not matter if it is a car or your body.

      I am tired of hearing people with $100 tennis shoes, $300 dollar cell phones, and designer clothing complain about how they cannot afford to pay out of pocket for their basic medical care. They should try saving their money instead of living above their means.

      Their "means" are those of serfs and slaves. What you describe is a pathetic attempt by them to try to hide their membership in this, ever increasing, underclass. And it would help little. Even if the shoes and phones went, as the medical insurance is a constant, monthly and far more expensive proposition. A $300 cell phone a month. Or more.

      I also tired of being modded down by people ..

      Why are you complaining to me? I never use my moderator points. I reply instead.

      that their Noam Chomsky view of the way the world should be is inherently superior to any other viewpoint when experience has shown time and again that wishful socialist thinking leads inevitably to the distribution of poverty and not wealth.

      What is it with Chomsky and right wing utopians? My contact with Chomsky was purely through Artificial Intelligence research. But I (and many others) get accused of being somehow under the man's spell continuously. He must have written something that really got under your skin.

      when experience has shown time and again that wishful socialist thinking leads inevitably to the distribution of poverty and not wealth.

      You are confusing liberal democracies like Canada with Soviet-style socialism. As far as I know, the Canadian government is actually producing surpluses and the Canadian economy is doing quite well (comparatively, to the US for example), thank you.

      Take your cool-aid and drink it someplace else, sir.

      cool-aid? It is you who is the cool-aid drinker around here, as your complete lack of understanding of most basic facts, in favour for ridiculous but self-centered schemes, indicates.

    37. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      What bothers me about the parent is that I fully expect him to crawl back here as soon as he gets into any medical trouble over there.

      You should know that I can not do that. Having become a non-resident of Canada, I can't simply return and be covered. I'd have to (and be allowed to temporarily) purchase private health insurance until the third month after my return (so a wait of 60 to 90 days). And, if I had a serious pre-existing condition, I would not be able to obtain such insurance, even for 90 days.

      I have personal experience with people paying high taxes all their lives for Canada's health care, and then were denied a lousy $20k surgery (AAA repair: $US19,985 +/- 7396 for endovascular or US$12,546 +/- 5944 for open repair reference) that was a death sentence for them. Oh, and if you're over 65 in the U.S., Medicare reimburses about US$19k of that. (AAAs are typically a condition of the elderly, though they can strike the young as well).

      I now know of another relative that needs this surgery and is not getting it. Tick, tick, tick.

      If anything, once I obtain U.S. citizenship, I'll likely renounce my Canadian citizenship -- one can not serve two masters.

      But, your comment is telling of the desparation among Canadians -- every one wants what they think they are entitled to, but no one else who may also be entitled should get it. This attitide and behavior where quite prominent when I lived in Markham, and Whitby, Ontario, for a while. It is typical of a fight over scarce resources, and reminided me of rats on a sinking ship.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    38. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      That fuck says it all about you. Do not come back here you fucking leech!

      Leech?

      Geez, I actually went out of my way to not subscribe to any social services during my short return -- I specifically did not reapply for health cards, and paid (quite illegally, actually) for whatever care I required, precisely to not be a hypocrite. My son, an American citizen, was permitted to have health insurance. It was rather funny, arguing with hospital administrators who insisted that he was a Canadian by blood: I produced his American passport and challenged them to prove his Canadian citizenship so they could deny him the right to pay for services.

      In fact, most of my family's health care expenses were incurred in the U.S.: I've been hospitalized twice: once for a nasty viral infection ($25k) and once for cellulitis surgery ($5k), my daughter had eye surgery ($6k) and my son had his tonsils removed ($2k). Then there is the matter of his birth ($3k). Canada paid for non of that, despite happily collecting taxes on my income when I lived there.

      No, I am quite certain that I received far less in services than I ever paid in taxes (and that included not collecting the child credit -- we believe that parents should support their own children).

      You are not angry because you think I will take what my taxes would entitle me to -- you are angry because I refuse to be robbed by your ilk.

      Look at your brain drain: I am independent of your chains and my numbers are growing.

      Watch now, as Canada seals its borders to emmigration.

      Sure and they get to eat whenever the bank happens to have some food, i.e. whenever you and other economic-rape artists feel pangs of conscience

      Actually, our local food banks never run out, though I expect that some might. Then, there are various shelters, and of course, the Sally Ann and other organizations. Private charity is quite vibrant in the U.S., partly because people aren't taxed to death.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    39. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      have personal experience with people paying high taxes all their lives for Canada's health care, and then were denied .... I now know of another relative that needs this surgery and is not getting it. Tick, tick, tick.

      And I have personal knowledge (that is I personally have heard of him) of that guy, who my second-removed cousin on my mother's side met throught his sister's girlfriend's schoolmate's aunt, who has this goose which lays golden eggs. Honest!

      I also could not help but notice that you provided some meaningless statistics about the cost of US surgeries. Which have no impact on Canadian public whatsoever. Nor do they in any way endorse your point. But the dollar amounts with +/- and all look so impressive! No wonder weak minded fools fall for it. Just look at some other posts on this thread. Some goofball posts completely made up statistics (80% of US citizens being employer-insured! Hah!) and gets +5 informative!

      If anything, once I obtain U.S. citizenship, I'll likely renounce my Canadian citizenship -- one can not serve two masters.

      Splendid. And yes, you refer to the assemblage of US politicians/big-business correctly. As a Master.

      But, your comment is telling of the desparation among Canadians -- every one wants what they think they are entitled to, but no one else who may also be entitled should get it.

      What? I got my medical care already, many times. I also gladly pay my taxes so that others can take advantage of the same thing. It is called taking care of each other. You know, the thing called "society". Never heard about it? What are you blabbering about then?

      It is typical of a fight over scarce resources, and reminided me of rats on a sinking ship.

      You remind me of a rat chewing through the ships hull so that he can get the wood-chips to build his own raft. And so what if the hole is the one which actually sinks the ship? He got his, everyone else go get theirs. Suckers!

      Your idea of the world is this lovely, "eat or be eaten", "dog eats dog", vicious, bloody race to nowhere, where the one who hoards the most (and manages to abuse as many others as possible on the way) "wins". I think that world-view is called "sociopathy".

      Meanwhile, the rest of us will work on making sure that the supply of the scarce resources is increased and that everyone has fair and equitable access to these resources that exist. That is what any sane group of people would do when faced with a problem of scarce resources.

    40. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      That is what any sane group of people would do when faced with a problem of scarce resources.

      Funny. Doctors weren't scare in Canada until there was universal health care coverage and their fees were fixed by the government.

      We know not of this "scarce resources" problem, at least when applied to doctors, in the U.S. If you'd stop taxing your "scarce resources" away, perhaps they'd not be so scarce.

      Then again you count MRI machines per province, whereas we count MRI machines per hospital.

      It's funny how scarcity is a self-fulfilling prophesy of socialist societies.

      The funny thing is that even planned societies sometimes get lucky. If Syncrude ever gets its act together, you'll be sitting on sh*tpiles of oil, and I doubt any private firm would ever risk the resources to try to develop the tar sands. It's one of the reasons alternative energy isn't big in the U.S. -- the oil shortage isn't bad enough yet. Besides, if you ever get oil out of the 'sands, we can just come and Iraq it away. (Not that I'd expect force to be used, but it's fun to feign force and see the defenseless get all upitty).

      Now shut up, before the U.S. decides to block export of cheap meds your way.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    41. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Geez, I actually went out of my way to not subscribe to any social services during my short return -- I specifically did not reapply for health cards, and paid (quite illegally, actually) for whatever care I required, precisely to not be a hypocrite ... etc. and so on ... my wad of cash is mightier then your Medicare ... blah blah ... I showed you!.

      I don't believe a word of this.

      You are not angry because you think I will take what my taxes would entitle me to -- you are angry because I refuse to be robbed by your ilk.

      No, I am angry that you would not pay taxes, diss the system and then take what you are thus not entitled to. I admit, stricter controls against the likes of you are something we should work on. That is one weakness of the Unviersal Medicare I will readilly agree exists.

      Look at your brain drain: I am independent of your chains and my numbers are growing.

      Your numbers growing is everything that you ever cared for. Worship of Mammon in its purest form. These "chains" as you call them are called "conscience", "society" and "civilization". No wonder you are yearning to be free of all of those.

      Watch now, as Canada seals its borders to emmigration.

      I think you have snorted too much of that white powder before posting this.

      Actually, our local food banks never run out, though I expect that some might. Then, there are various shelters, and of course, the Sally Ann and other organizations. Private charity is quite vibrant in the U.S., partly because people aren't taxed to death.

      And it works wonders.

    42. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Now shut up, before the U.S. decides to block export of cheap meds your way.

      The reason that they are cheap here is because otherwise the 20 year patent protections which Canadian government granted to them under the condition of price controls would be removed. Followed by Canada's generic drug makers becoming the suppliers of drugs to 90% of USA. But you knew that, didn't you?

      Funny. Doctors weren't scare in Canada until there was universal health care coverage and their fees were fixed by the government. We know not of this "scarce resources" problem, at least when applied to doctors, in the U.S. If you'd stop taxing your "scarce resources" away, perhaps they'd not be so scarce.

      Let me explain to you how this works: some doctors (and many other professionals) are supremely greedy sons of bitches. Luckily for them, there is one place on Earth that is insane enough to allow them to control access to medical care for all of its citizens. In that place, called the USA, they can make fortunes completely out of proportion with their services to society. The result of such a thing is that many US citizens have no medical care, most only partial and the doctors get supremely rich. Not to mention other middle-men such as the insurance companies. That is chiefly because medical care is not an element of a free market and not even of capitalism per se. Patients do not qualify as Adam Smith's "educated consumers" as in many cases they arrive in the hospital unconscious and thus unable to "shop" for medical services. Not to mention the lack of knowledge required to even do such "shopping". So, consequently, by being direct neighbours to complete insanity, it is only natural that some unscrupulous medical professionals would leave to hope to get rich quick in such an environment. Luckily, most are sane and understand their role in society. And they dont leave. Many older doctors are actually coming back, having tasted the way things work in the US. That is the long answer to your "scarcity" of doctors. The short answer is: you are an idiot. Do not let reality interfere with your engaging in the oldest pursuit of man: trying to morally justify your own selfish greed.

      It's funny how scarcity is a self-fulfilling prophesy of socialist societies.

      Only temporarily, when they are neighbours to insane houses of cards built on pure greed. If they can make it to the next "depression" there is smooth sailing afterwards, at least for a few decades, until the memories wane and the greedmongers overtake the discourse again amidst the affluence. Rinse, repeat.

    43. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      I don't believe a word of this.

      I wouldn't expect thieves to believe that there are honest people in the world who do not take what they believe they are not entitled to, even if they can do so easily and conveniently.

      I do not believe in universal healthcare as practiced in Canada, and to the degree possible, refuse to subscribe to it. Note, that for a Canadian citizen living in Canada, this choice is illegal, even if one pays the taxes to support the system.

      It is you who is the thief: suggesting that I pay for something I do not use at a price I can not afford. Oh, and I'd appreciate it if you kept your comments from appearing as part of something you quoted me as writing. I guess you slipped a closing tag, or something.

      Your numbers growing is everything that you ever cared for

      I was referring to Canadians leaving Canada, because of the high taxes and poor services, not net worth. But, if you want to bring it up, yes, I want my net worth to increase. So that, in my old age, I can afford to pay for my health care needs without being a burden on others, and so that I can support the charities of my choice today. I trust the Sally Ann a heck of a lot more than I trust old Uncles Jean and Paul, eh? Cousin Ralph, well him I like, but then Albertans were always more decent folk. I wouldn't mess with them if I were you though, they might still be a bit sore over old Uncle Pierre taking their oil and "sharing" it.

      When I left Canada, I had to "settle the score", tax wise: realizing capital gains, and so on. According to Canadian laws, I was "free and clear" and didn't owe anything. In fact, I never received more than I paid in taxes. Canada would have been worse off revenue wise if I never lived and worked there. The only Canadian laws I ever may have broken related to my paying for services instead of sucking at the taxpayer's teat -- I'd rather be a criminal than a hyocrite.

      But, you see a revenue source in the skilled worker, to be enslaved and taxed. How dare I not let you enslave me!

      Well, I don't. Nyeah, nyeah, nyeah! Go, go close your borders in desparation. Keep your productive citizenry behind bars, taxing them. The faster you make it worse, the sooner the revolution will come.

      As a foreigner in the U.S., I am very much a second class person. Still, it is far better than my life in Canada ever was, and someone has to expose the horrors of socialism there. Call it a twinge of left-over patriotism: the best thing I can do for Canada is to not feed the tax monster and hasten the withdrawl from the addiction of bogus social services.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    44. Re:Income tax misnomer by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      No I refer to him as a loon because of what he proposed. Also, being a Nobel Prize winning economist is not exactly an automatic endorsement, afer the antics some of the "top" ones have perpetrated in not so distant past. Finally, economy is not exactly "science" and only seen as such by other economists (and various related greed mongers).

      It would be better so say that you disagree with his position rather than engaging in the logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. It is true that smart and powerful people sometimes misbehave? Or course, they are only human after all. However, it is disingenuous to suggest, whether by implication or direct comment, that all Nobel Prize winning economists are somehow suspect because of the personal indiscretions of a few of their peers.

      It is not only not absurd, it is the situation at present. Most of the uninsured seek attention at Emergency Rooms only after "home remedies" and other desperate measures failed. This is one of the reasons of the severe overcrowding of the ER services in public hospitals.

      How many of these emergency room visits actually needed the services of a hospital emergency room instead of a regular doctor's office visit? If people would take better care of themselves then they would not need to take desperate measures. The real reason that we have overcrowding in hospital emergency rooms here in the United States is that illegal immigrants and deadbeats would rather have society foot the bill for their medical care and they don't care that the emergency room is vastly more expensive than the doctors office because they have no intention of paying anything when the bill comes. The truly destitute receive medical care on the government's dime even here in the United States, we are not barbarians after all, but surely you must agree that many of the people crowding those emergency rooms could have paid $100 to visit the doctor instead of shirking their responsibilities, but they just didn't feel like paying and they rationalize it because they think that society owes them something or the just don't give a crap that someone else has to pay for their free ride. I am not uncaring, but answer me this: why should I be financially responsible, through higher taxes or higher costs, for the poor lifestyle choices that other people make?

      If you have no money for the oil change you have only two options: do not drive (or live in this case) or keep on driving, hoping for the best (and pray furiously, given that most poor are very religious).

      How many of the aforementioned people that do not want to pay really couldn't pay? We all have to do things that we don't necessarily enjoy doing like paying the mortgage, paying our taxes, and paying for our healthcare. If you chose to keep on driving then you are unwise to expect that you will dodge the bullet every time. If they are religious then they can probably receive some help through their church if they are truly needy and such help can be anonymous so that dignity is maintained. We all fall on hard times at some point in our lives and religious communities can provide support for us when we need it the most so don't knock religion, it may save your life and not just on this earth.

      No money means no money. It does not matter if it is a car or your body.

      This is yet another logical fallacy, Argumentum ad lazarum or argument that the conclusion is correct because the subject of the argument is poor or without means. The truly destitute receive help in a civilized society from either the government or private charities (including churches), but it is wrong to say that the average person cannot pay for their healthcare because they are poor or a member of some perceived underclass. They may have less than other people who are better off but they are not penniless.

      Their "means" are those of serfs and slaves. What you describe is a pathetic attempt by them to try to hide their membership in this, ever increasing, unde

    45. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Let me explain to you how this works: some doctors (and many other professionals) are supremely greedy sons of bitches

      Translation: they would like to earn what someone is willing to pay them.

      Frankly, if that attracts the best surgeons at astronomical prices to a country, then it is better than not having those surgeons at all.

      What, you're going to restrict what they can earn, effectively put a gun to their head, and order them to operate!?

      Yeah, sure, tell ya what, you can go under their knife first, O.K.?

      --
      You could've hired me.
    46. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      The parent poster did too, as he himself admitted when he was "down on luck" in the States

      At no time did Canadian health insurance cover any of my medical expenses in the U.S. As a non-resident I was not eligible for coverage (and rightly so), nor was I liable for taxes.

      In fact, it is technically possible for one to be a resident for tax purposes in Canada, taxed on world-wide income (e.g. I might own a house in Canada), and still not be eligible for Canadian health care coverage if I did not physically reside there.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    47. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Well, to recieve the health care would require me to apply for it, and in Ontario, that means agreeing to live in the province permanently, something I was not willing to do. (I can understand a mnimum residency requirement, but "permanently"? I don't think so. The law actually stipulates that 153 days of residency are required after getting coverage, but makes no mention of agreeing to longer residency being an unenforcable contract.)

      The odd thing is that it is illegal for someome eligible for health care (i.e. sign away the right to move out of province), to pay for it.

      However, my character would not let me take advantage of a system with which I disagreed, so I found a way to pay. (I simply claimed that I did not have a health card).

      Yes, un-Canadian: I do not believe in theft, even when sanctioned by a mob.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    48. Re:Income tax misnomer by Halfbaked+Plan · · Score: 1

      The 'dittoheads' don't know who or what Noam Chomsky even is.

      They're the same sort of ignorant sloganeering automatrons as the people who call them 'dittoheads.'

      All I heard you say was: "Do not come back here you fucking leech! You've abandoned this country, you are opposed to what it stands for, you pay your taxes to another and obviously have greater allegiance to another so stay the fuck out!. "

      That sounds like dittohead jingoism to me.

      --
      resigned
    49. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I wouldn't expect thieves to believe that there are honest people in the world who do not take what they believe they are not entitled to, even if they can do so easily and conveniently.

      A thief? A dickhead who lives off the backs of others and who considers himself "earning" all his money calls me a thief? Explain to me, worm, why exactly is society entitled to paying you money at all?! What the fuck do you do? Produce food? Mine minerals? Manufacture durable goods, that enable people to do the above? Provide medical care to others? Engage in scientific discoveries? Or perhaps you are just a pencil-necked IT dork whose entire life revolves around inconsequential fluff and who, due to unfortunate perversions of society, and his own thieving ways, receives far, far, far more then he ever deserved? And then, in his infinite arrogance and hubris, he dares to go around calling others "thieves" just because they see him for the self-aggrandising, pathetic worm that he is? And dare to impose on him some rules of civilised behaviour, an inconsequential payment for the great good greaces the society granted him?

      It is you who is the thief: suggesting that I pay for something I do not use at a price I can not afford.

      Oh yes you use it. All the fucking time. Everytime you want something of another Canadian. It is very likely that he lives thanks to the Medicare.

      Also, you must be then against all taxation. Police? Thieves! How dare they fund police! Private armies is the way to go! Roads?! Toll roads, all of them! You are so stupid that is defies description.

      I was referring to Canadians leaving Canada, because of the high taxes and poor services, not net worth.

      Which is higly questionable, I even posted a link to CTVs coverage of a net gain of doctors in Canada. But do not let facts bother you.

      I wouldn't mess with them if I were you though, they might still be a bit sore over old Uncle Pierre taking their oil and "sharing" it.

      If Klein doesn't settle down, it might happen again. Either they are Canadians, or they are Albertans or perhaps Republic Of Edmonton's Greedetarians. It never ceases to amaze me how the greedmonkeys are all for a "nation" when it comes to beating up on some 3rd world country and then for sedition of their neighbourhood's 2 sqare blocks to form its own "country" as soon as they find something they can make cash on in there. And then call everyone else "thieves" for wanting to get them to share as others have shared with them. "Mine! Its all Mine! Me! I! Mine! Me! All Mine!". Sort of like your mindset.

      According to Canadian laws, I was "free and clear" and didn't owe anything. In fact, I never received more than I paid in taxes.

      Bullshit. There is no such law. Otherwise you would be still paying.

      Canada would have been worse off revenue wise if I never lived and worked there. The only Canadian laws I ever may have broken related to my paying for services instead of sucking at the taxpayer's teat -- I'd rather be a criminal than a hyocrite.

      You are not only a hypocrite, you are a bald faced liar.

      But, you see a revenue source in the skilled worker, to be enslaved and taxed.

      US does not require you to pay taxes?! I think they call that "tax evasion". You should look into it before some gentlemen with guns show up from that outfit called the IRS.

      Well, I don't. Nyeah, nyeah, nyeah! Go, go close your borders in desparation. Keep your productive citizenry behind bars, taxing them. The faster you make it worse, the sooner the revolution will come.

      You are a crazy loon in search of a way to try to silence what remains of your conscience (which tells you that you are evil, your posts show it clearly) and failing. Revolution? You stand a higher chance of it happening in the US where the liberals are starting to boil and there is a heck of a lot more of them there then there is wacko libertarian nuts like you in Canada. And I am

    50. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      That's like quoting a scientolgist in order to support an argument that spacefaring dc-9s and galatic tyrants (XENU!!!!) really exist.

      Something tells me if the link was to the Free Republic you would ne singing praises of it.

      I'm gonna have to agree with the previous poster, you really are divorced from reality.

      Never you mind that it is actual people in that thread with the actual insurance company plans. I was under the impression that constuted reality. But by all means, do enlighten me, where one does find "reality" if not in actual events?

    51. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      LOL. Hey buddy, why don't you slave through 8 years of higher education to become a MD (at least in the US), and then tell me how greedy I am.

      Everything has limits. 8 years of higher education does not translate to the wages equivalent to 40 of 5 year high education graduates, or should it?

      That is if you ever decide to finally move out of your parent's basement. Its easy being a mini-Marx when you really don't have to worry about getting the bills paid. Now you see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help I'm being repressed!

      Oh, another classic. I probably earn more than that goof in the US who I am debating.

    52. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      It would be better so say that you disagree with his position rather than engaging in the logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. It is true that smart and powerful people sometimes misbehave? Or course, they are only human after all. However, it is disingenuous to suggest, whether by implication or direct comment, that all Nobel Prize winning economists are somehow suspect because of the personal indiscretions of a few of their peers.

      On one hand you criticise me for daring to take Friedman's theory with a gigiantic grain of salt because of his "credentials" and in the next sentence you claim that I should ignore the total failure of his profession's top members, which directly impacts his "credentials" as an economist. For the record, I know of no economist who actually did anything practically useful as far as daily operation of free markets and society is concerned. Nothing at least that could be directly traced to him. Friedman's "credentials" are worthless to me (and actually work against him).

      ... Argumentum ad lazarum or argument that the conclusion is correct because the subject of the argument is poor or without means. ...

      The several paragraphs of your responses seem to follow the same basic pattern. You imply that it is unfair to offer public services because one cannot distinguish if the person in question is taking advantage of them because they are truly unable to pay or merely not wanting to pay. I am sure that the 10 hour wait times in the public ERs must somewhat discourage the second group. Never the less, it is possible that a percentage of those attending are indeed capable but unwilling to pay. Friedman's solution does not address this issue at all. Those who refuse to pay will still be in the same boat as those who cannot pay are today. With the exception of being able to obtain the "catastrophic" insurance. Friedman's system in no way encourages change in this area.

      The Noam Chomsky remark was somewhat off the cuff, it is not your fault that I disagree with his writings, but I had the distinct impression from reading your earlier posts that you had read some of his books.

      I came to my positions because of personal life experiences. I do read quite a bit but as far as books are concerned I find the old-time classics such as Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" or "The Wealth Of Nations" far more instructive (and amusingly at odds with those who profess to be the followers of the tenets laid therein) then the modern analysis which tends to be too focused on various specifics. Most of the issues that I end up discussing are of basic, phillosophical nature at their core. My understanding of Chomsky is that he was focusing on the influence of wealth/power on access to information and manipulation of media in order to control the "free will" of consumers/citizens. It is an important aspect of modern life and a discussion in on itself, as FOX and Clear Channel as well as general degeneration of news media evidence but by no means a basic societal/economic force.

      The posts of other Canadians in this thread bear out my personal experience in speaking with Canadians that most average Canadians who have lived in both countries, when asked, will concede that the overall quality of living, including healthcare, is better here in the United States.

      That is highly subjective. You see, unlike old nasty me, most Canadians are very polite, specially to foreigners and would agree with you just to please you. Also a certain group of (mostly former) Canadians who is ideologially enthrolled with wealth and accumulation of thereof is far more likely to move to the US and therefore to come in contact with you. Additionally, it seems that this group is quite over-reprsented on Slashdot, which for some reason seems to attract libertarians like a corpse does flies. For which I am grateful since they provide me with much amusement.

      The healthcare system in Canada seems great if you are one of th

    53. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Translation: they would like to earn what someone is willing to pay them.

      Which is the definition of uncontrollable greed. At some point in time their conscience should kick in to warn them that getting (to exaggerate) $40 million for something that is not worth $50 is immoral.

      What, you're going to restrict what they can earn, effectively put a gun to their head, and order them to operate!? Yeah, sure, tell ya what, you can go under their knife first, O.K.?

      Not at all. What should happen is that there should be a national negotiation process, with input from both citizens and surgeons to establish what a "fair" level of pay is and then everyone sticks to it. As I already mentioned, most medical services do not, due to their nature, fall under the auspicies of "free market" or capitalism. Free market forces of "competition" do not function in this area.

    54. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      They're the same sort of ignorant sloganeering automatrons as the people who call them 'dittoheads.'

      I merely responded in kind.

      That sounds like dittohead jingoism to me.

      Yes he did annoy me momentarily, I admit. So, as a result, perhaps unwisely, I used his own technique on him. But sometimes stooping to the rather low level of your opponent works. Occasionally.

    55. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      My point exactly! Its easy to be a socialist when you're rich isn't it?

      Easy? Apparently not. Of course it is possible to pay more taxes when you have more. The trick is that some of those who have more find sharing it unspeakably abhorrent and consider it "theft" and "robbery". As you apparently have. I do not belong to that group and I am not quite sure what your "point" was.

      TW I'm not an U.S. citizen, and - if your 'canned socialism' drivel is anything to go on - thankfully not a Canadian

      That makes two of us. I am also thankful that you are not a Canadian. Have fun at your place and watch out for disgruntled serfs.

    56. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      The posts of other Canadians in this thread bear out my personal experience in speaking with Canadians that most average Canadians who have lived in both countries, when asked, will concede that the overall quality of living, including healthcare, is better here in the United States.

      "That is highly subjective. You see, unlike old nasty me, most Canadians are very polite, specially to foreigners and would agree with you just to please you."

      Just to be clear, this Canadian does not "concede" that the overall quality of life is better in the U.S.: I celebrate that fact (since it gives Canadians who might take a minute to pull their heads out of one another's socialist asses a chance to learn, imitate, and improve, their lot). If I criticize Americans en masse, it's usually to admonish them to kiss the ground they walk on because they do not realise how fortunate they are.

      Oh, and I'm not known to be polite. Then again, unlike the stereotypical Canadian, I do not find Americans who make a fuss to get what they've paid for, "rude", either. "Angry", perhaps, but justifiably so.

      If anything, I find many of my fellow Canadians somewhat arrogant and smug, in a "holier than thow" way, what with their "peacekeepers," diplolacy, and all that. Ask them about Somalia sometimes when they bring up Abu Grahib.

      Now, there are some areas where Canada seams to excel, compared to the U.S.: High-speed internet access is a bit cheaper, and less of a hassle to get: DSL standards were largely dictated so one can buy a DSL modem retail, and it will work with any ISP. Sometimes the bully gets it right. But, that is no justification for being a bully when the market can sort itself out.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    57. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Which is the definition of uncontrollable greed. At some point in time their conscience should kick in to warn them that getting (to exaggerate) $40 million for something that is not worth $50 is immoral.

      How can it be immoral if someone is willing and able to pay?

      If you think someone charges too much for their services, go elsewhere. If you can't go elsewhere, then charge him a premium for your. In fact, get your friends to go along:

      "Oh hello, Mr. Greedy, would you like a coffee today?"

      "How much>"

      "Well, for you, $10,000."

      There are ways to deel with what you perceive as greed other than by theft.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    58. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Not at all. What should happen is that there should be a national negotiation process, with input from both citizens and surgeons to establish what a "fair" level of pay is and then everyone sticks to it.

      I see.

      So, 300,000,000 citizens and 300,000 surgeons use a democratic process to settle on a wage? Sounds like putting gun to someone's head to me, if only figuratively.

      You know, all that does is prevent the surgeons from distinguishing themselves based on their skill and success rate. Yeah, all the good doctors leave.

      That's exactly what happened in Canada.

      If anything, the lack of a free(er) market in health care has more to do with legislation than anything else. If you want to attack the U.S., you should be attacking the rise of corporatism, where money buys law that benefits big business. That is not the same thing as free market capitalism, and is more akin to Mussolini-style fascism.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    59. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      $1200 a month is cheaper?

      Yes, even if I had to pay it out of pocket, it would be cheaper than the taxes I paid in Canada.

      Though, I grant that $200 to $400 a month is more typical: we do have excellent health care. My point was that even at this extreme end of the benefits range (and, really, it is not a large fraction of my remuneration and I am not in the "CEO class", just a middle class working stiff), it is still cheaper for a married couple with kids and one income to live in the U.S.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    60. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Society pays me nothing. My customers pay me,

      Err, no. These people are members of the society. If you lived alone in the mountains, as a hermit, then perhaps you would not be interacting with the society.

      generally for my skills related to the design of software, that they, in turn can leverage to either lower their operational costs, or use to provide a service to others.

      In other words: inconsequential fluff. If you were to disappear tommorow, no if the entire branch of profession of yours were to disappear tommorow there would be no appreciable difference to the operation of American society. Fluff. Inconsequential. On good graces of the society. A self-important, self-agrandising, and completely irrelevant flea on a back of the society who thinks he is running the show. Expecting accolades and riches. That is what you are. And yet, largely through connivery, you receive the resources of many people whose importance to the daily workings of the society around you is of orders of magnitude greater then yours. It is apparent that you are in a dire need of a rather large dose of humble pie and some ego-shrinking excercises.

      Expatriating Canadians must pay unrealized capital gains taxes when they leave Canada.

      Capital gains taxes? You nimrod, that is to do with investments you have in this country, not the things that the public system have provided to you. Like medicare when you were a child. Public schools. Probably money for your higher education. You did not pay back any of it, you hypocrite. And he whines that they dared to make him pay his outsanding taxes on the profits on the investments you made thanks to all that education. And you think that makes you even?! What a dork.

      Four poeple live from my income (albeit two of them are children of our own making),

      I am really starting to look forward to full commoditization of software and the insuing ego-shrinkage of yours. I bet GPL must be driving you insane.

      Er, strike a deal with the U.S.? You take all their socialists and send them all your capitalists. But then, who'd pay your taxes, with everyone on welfare?

      You mean all liberals (or even a majority) in the US are on welfare!? All capitalists are right-wing wackos or libertarians?! Ever read Adam Smith? Hurt your head much banging on walls recently?

      Incidently, I think that would be quite a good deal. Seriously. We get most of the academia, scientists, and labour and you end up with all the stock brokers and insane fundamentalist nutcases who would make you recite passages from Bible every hour and check your programs for "Satanic influences". Sounds like a plan to me.

      Where's a good Libertarian when you need one?

      Why, in some insane asylum, where you would find most of them, of course. Are you planning to join them soon?

      Actually I am kidding. You should get all the 4 members of the Libertarian party in your area co-opt other ones from all over and set up a libertarian, or better yet Objectivist, "society" on some unpopulated island. Preferrably as far from mainland as possible to avoid the half-eaten chunks of Libertarian heroes landing in any populated areas when the Libertarian "society" comes to its unavoidable climax.

    61. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      you think dailykos represents 'actual events' I've gotta bridge I'd like to sell you. . .

      You seriously do not expect me to believe that all those people manfuactured all of their experiences, complete with insurance company phone numbers and statements? Are you suggesting that DailyKos has some sort of supernatural powers and is capable of conjuring insurance companies out of thin air to bolster someone's diary on it?

    62. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      How can it be immoral if someone is willing and able to pay?

      The same way as it is immoral for a billionaire to buy some living person's organs even if that person agreed to it out of desperation so that she can assure some future for her children. The fact that someone is willing to pay for something, and even the fact that someone is willing to sell it, does not make the transaction moral! Just the fact that I have to explain this to you, tells volumes about your psyche.

      Taxation is "theft!" (paraphrasing) ... you "thief" .... Well, for you, $10,000. ... There are ways to deel with what you perceive as greed other than by theft

      Wait a minute. Sooo ... making someone contribute to a common societal fund is not ok and theft ... but extorting money from him when he is buying cofee ... is a great idea and a viable, practical method to ensure end to profiteering! Woohoo! Really?! Wait, what does that cofeee vendor do with that $9,999 of "extra" profit?! Are you off your medication again?

    63. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Yes, even if I had to pay it out of pocket, it would be cheaper than the taxes I paid in Canada.

      You would have then belonged to less then 1% of your population with incomes in six digits. Not even worth discussing in regards to what are the conditions for most Candadians and Americans.

      and, really, it is not a large fraction of my remuneration and I am not in the "CEO class", just a middle class working stiff

      With more then $1200 a month taxation for health alone in Canada?! A working stiff? Is that software you are working is somehow connected to one of the Colombian cartels?

    64. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Err, no. These people are members of the society

      Funny, I don't "interact with society". I interact with individuals, who have come to develop norms regarding intercating with one another. Those norms establish society. Even when I do business with UberMegaCorp Inc. I interact via an individual.

      In other words: inconsequential fluff. If you were to disappear tommorow, no if the entire branch of profession of yours were to disappear tommorow there would be no appreciable difference to the operation of American society.

      Perhaps, but people like me disappeared 25 years ago, there'd be no personal computers, CD players, DVD players, cell phones, satellite TV, etc. O.K. I suppose that much of that is, as you say "fluff", but gosh darn, people do seam to like their "fluff" don't they? Heck, cell phones have saved lives, so some of that fluff is actually "usefull".

      People don't need indoor plumbing either, but, thanks to John Crapper, they sure are glad they have it.

      FWIW, some of my "fluff" goes into testing every phone line in England, every day, to track breakdowns before they happen, so that preemptive repair crews can be dispatched. That means that when someone picks up the phone to make an emergency call, they're more likely to get through and a life possibly saved, than if I never made that kind of "fluff".

      I wonder what "fluff" wouldn't exist in the future if people like me didn't exist. Atlas shrugged, indeed.

      You did not pay back any of it, you hypocrite.

      Pay what back?

      Lemme get this straight: I pay $X in taxes to support Y services of which I receive $Z (Z No, you don't want me to "pay back" anything. You want me to be an indentured tax slave and pay more. Fuk 'dat noiz.

      I am really starting to look forward to full commoditization of software and the insuing ego-shrinkage of yours. I bet GPL must be driving you insane.

      LOL!

      Actually, I rather like the GPL, though it might give my employer heartburn. There is a place for free and non-free software in the world, and I have contributed to both kinds (and been very careful to not violate the GPL in the process). In fact, part of the justification for charging to license software is that, in a free market, GPL alternatives could possibly exist: "license mine or write your own".

      The GPL is actually a good example of how community cooperation can offset "corporate greed". More services can be established that operated on a cooperative basis, increasingly eliminating the justification for them to be provided by big government. If anything, the GPL exemplifies the free market.

      No, I am not worried: there is plenty of software to be written.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    65. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      If there were a legal market in organs, there would be far more organ transplants, and many more lives would be saved as a result. Indeed, posthumous sales of stiff viable organs could very well help establish a legacy where there might otherwise not be one. The rich get to live, and the poor get to send their kids or grandkids to college so they can perhaps become rich.

      And, how is offering a cup of coffee for $10,000 extortion? No one has to buy that cup of coffee for $10,000. Indeed, there may be others willing to sell that cup of coffee for $1.

      But, if Mr. GreedyIOwnAllThePropertyInTownAndChargeHighRents wants to buy a cup of coffee in town, well he might just find that all the coffee vendors charge $10,000. He can drive to the next town. Sounds fair to me.

      In practice, the price of a cup of coffee in town for Mr. Greedy...Rents would be about $1 plus the cost of gas, wear and tear on a car, time, etc. to get one out of town.

      The fact of the matter is that if Mr. Greedy...Rents is all that greedy and mean, he will be shunned. Ask your local Amish or Mennonite about shunning, some time.

      There are far more moral ways to make the rich "pay" than theft. Also, you will generally find that in most socialist economies, it isn't the rich that are being made to "pay" -- it is the middle class. The rich find themselves as part of the "elected" governing class. When was the last time a Canadian politician waited for health care?

      --
      You could've hired me.
    66. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Perhaps, but people like me disappeared 25 years ago, there'd be no personal computers, CD players, DVD players, cell phones, satellite TV, etc. O.K. I suppose that much of that is, as you say "fluff", but gosh darn, people do seam to like their "fluff" don't they? Heck, cell phones have saved lives, so some of that fluff is actually "usefull".

      You make yourself sound far more important then you are (it figures). First of all, I did not mention all programmers, only the ones doing whatever vertical thing you are in, which is still a significant number. Furthermore, if all programmers went away, and even if digital computers went away, DVDs, cell phones and what not, the society would march on. Communications would be based on analog technologies, music would still play from cassettes and so on. That is the whole point of the excercise. Now, for an amusing contrast, remove all farmers. How about just bakers? Construction workers? See the difference?

      People don't need indoor plumbing either, but, thanks to John Crapper, they sure are glad they have it.

      Crapper was not the inventor, ancient Romans were. He did not even invent the modern toilet. However, the utility of indoor plumbing vs computers, puts plumbers ahead of you and me on importance to society scale. Funny that.

      FWIW, some of my "fluff" goes into testing every phone line in England,

      Which operated long before you, software, computers and even transistors waltzed onto the scene.

      I wonder what "fluff" wouldn't exist in the future if people like me didn't exist.

      There would be other fluff to compensate. But no matter which way you cut it, the society can survive without all but a very few core professions. And yours is not one of them. And yet you expect to get paid as if the whole thing operated out of your ass.

      Atlas shrugged, indeed.

      You, Atlas?! Oh pooor you, carrying all the weight of the world on your poooor shoulders. No wonder you expect to get paid like a king! Carrying a planet on your back is hell of a job, why with all of them freeloader bakers, miners and plumbers riding on it! How dare they!

      Lemme get this straight: I pay $X in taxes to support Y services of which I receive $Z (Z No, you don't want me to "pay back" anything. You want me to be an indentured tax slave and pay more. Fuk 'dat noi

      No I want you to cough up what you did not pay and yet got service for. Don't come back. Just send one big fat cheque for your earlier years, when you did not pay and mooch. Then we are done.

      If anything, the GPL exemplifies the free market.

      Really? And what is the "currency" of that market? Just curious.

    67. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      And yet you expect to get paid as if the whole thing operated out of your ass.

      No, I expect to get paid what people are willing to pay me. People like their "fluff" so they are willing to pay for it.

      Without farmers, everyone whould farm, or hunt.

      It is generally efficient to not have everyone do everything, but rather to segregate by function, as geography and other factors allow.

      Without programmers, you'd have "tinkerers" who would make things others wanted, and so would rise the programming profession.

      More importantly, without programmers, much of modern medicine would not exist, and we'd be back in the dark ages.

      No, I am not all that important, as an individual. But, in a free market I interact with others to produce what is wanted and needed. I am paid what the market deems me to be worth.

      I want you to cough up what you did not pay and yet got service for.

      And what, precisely, would that be? At my best estimate I paid far more in taxes that I ever received in goods and services. Don't you think that if I was getting more than what I paid, I would want to stay in Canada so long as the good times lasted?

      --
      You could've hired me.
    68. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      If there were a legal market in organs, there would be far more organ transplants, and many more lives would be saved as a result. Indeed, posthumous sales of stiff viable organs could very well help establish a legacy where there might otherwise not be one. The rich get to live, and the poor get to send their kids or grandkids to college so they can perhaps become rich.

      This really puts an end to any kind of discussion of morality with you. You are offically a sociopathic, amoral monster. With utterly no clue as to consequences of trade in organs. I pity you.

      But, if Mr. GreedyIOwnAllThePropertyInTownAndChargeHighRents wants to buy a cup of coffee in town, well he might just find that all the coffee vendors charge $10,000. He can drive to the next town. Sounds fair to me.

      Replace the coffee guys with Revenue Canada and the town with a country. You were saying?

      The fact of the matter is that if Mr. Greedy...Rents is all that greedy and mean, he will be shunned. Ask your local Amish or Mennonite about shunning, some time.

      Yes that is a practical way to deal with the problem in a country of 300 million. That is probably why it works so well over there.

      When was the last time a Canadian politician waited for health care?

      Depends what kind. An elective surgery they do. And when they try to use their money to circumvent the process they get caught and pay the price. It happened several times. Luckily it is rather tough to sneak past all of these doctors and nurses who, for the most part, believe in the system.

    69. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      More importantly, without programmers, much of modern medicine would not exist, and we'd be back in the dark ages.

      That is flatly untrue. Most of the IT in the medicine, like everywhere else, is in administration. Even MRI and similar systems can be made to function as purely analog systems (much more clumsily but functional).

      No, I am not all that important, as an individual. But, in a free market I interact with others to produce what is wanted and needed. I am paid what the market deems me to be worth.

      Great, we are making progress. Now for step 2 of the therapy: are all of the societal interactions governed by free market?

      And what, precisely, would that be? At my best estimate I paid far more in taxes that I ever received in goods and services. Don't you think that if I was getting more than what I paid, I would want to stay in Canada so long as the good times lasted?

      You did receive more then you paid, by far, in your first 20 years of life. Then the deal became more fair and you were expected to shoulder a part of the burden. But that was not compatible with your selfish, greedy, egoistic psyche. That is when you left in a hurry for a place where you could cash in on what Canada gave you and where you do not have to be "bothered" by demands of any contributions to be made back by you.

    70. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      You are offically a sociopathic, amoral monster. With utterly no clue as to consequences of trade in organs.

      I know full well the consequences of trade in organs. It has the same positive and negative consequences as trade in anything else: black markets, extortion, even theft. I think a person should be free to trade in parts of their body if they wish. After all, who owns them if not the individual making use of them?

      Yes that is a practical way to deal with the problem in a country of 300 million. That is probably why it works so well over there.

      If a $1 cup of coffe could only be had a 2000 miles away, it would be.

      But, you see, the people who shun Mr. Greedy...Rents would only be the ones who felt that he was mean or unfair, and the more (or less) that number is, the more (or less) inconvenient his life would be made. Sounds like a nicely balancing system. And the nice thing is that there is no overhead: everybody charges Mr. Greedy...Rents what they think is fair, given his behavior.

      You know, it seams that you think everyone earning a decent wage is trying to stash every penny they get, are miserly tippers, and never help anyone else. No doubt there are people like that. Perhaps you think people are like that because you are like that.

      But, I am not. I have greater respect for those that do the jobs that I do not wish to: I pay my part-time housekeeper more than she asks (about double minimum wage) in line with the market. I routinely tip 20-25% to waitstaff, and, as the "holiday season" rolls around, I'm particularly obvious in demonstrating charity to my kids over and above my usual contribution levels -- $20 into a Sally Ann kettle on a whim is typical for me. I will do this many times between now and the new year. There have been times when I could contribute nothing due to unemployment, and there have been times when I can be genourous. This is one of those times in my life. I've been known to drop a Benjamin into the "Food Bank" jar at the local watering hole -- three of us are regular contributors and have been directly responsible for several hundred pounds of food delivered this Thanksgiving.

      This is not to "easy my concience". I owe the poor nothing, and my housekeeper is quite capable of negotiating a wage. But, I don't like to be considered "Mr. Greedy...Rents", so while I like to live well, and save for a rainy day, I do make a concious effort to "spread the wealth" to a reasonable degree.

      Many of my friends and neighbors act accordingly. We do not tolerate sloth very much but we respond when disaster strikes due to no fault of the afflicted.

      The thing is, together, our voluntary, collective efforts add up to far more than I ever saw governments in Canada accomplish.

      But, you would not understand or believe this. Like all thieves who encounter an unwilling victim, you see me as a sociopathic amoral monster.

      There is no hope for you. Pity Canada.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    71. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      That is flatly untrue. Most of the IT in the medicine, like everywhere else, is in administration. Even MRI and similar systems can be made to function as purely analog systems (much more clumsily but functional).

      Ahem. Embedded systems. Ahem.

      Do you really thing that clumsy is better? I suppose you think that electrical engineers also produce "fluff", after all they don't produce food. Perhaps that MRI should be a mechanical contraption. I'd hate to see how that would work: "Firzt vee take microscopicly thin slices of skull and brain, ja? Den, we send each vun to worker for micoroscope viewing. Need many microscope viewers -- good job dat. Den, ve put head and brain together." I hear that one can perform surgery without anasthesia too.

      You did receive more then you paid, by far, in your first 20 years of life

      I've been financially independent since about 14. But up until then, it was my father who was taxed severely, who provided support for me. In the mid 1970s my mother had to return to work just to pay our growing tax burden! And, they arrived in Canada as refugees, with nothing, at a time when there was no assistance for such refugees other than being allowed admittance. Certainly no welfare. (My father had to work off that admittance by working as a farm hand in Manitoba for nothing more than room and board). When he got sick, he had private health insurance in the 1950s (working for RCA Victor at the time).

      Matter of fact, things went well for them, working hard, until Trudeau put that damn social safety net into high-gear and started to tax them in spades.

      No, we owe Canada nothing that hasn't been "paid back" many times over, culminating with the death of my father at the hands of a health care system that didn't want to spend $20k after taking his taxes for forty some odd years.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    72. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      With more then $1200 a month taxation for health alone in Canada?!

      Obviously not for healthcare alone. With more than $1200 a month taxation overall.

      The point is, that even paying $1200 a month for health insurance, my tax burden in the U.S. is so much lower that I'd still be ahead.

      Now, six figures might sound like a big income, but realize that it provides for all the needs of four people. A 25-30k income is not that much.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    73. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I know full well the consequences of trade in organs. It has the same positive and negative consequences as trade in anything else: black markets, extortion, even theft. I think a person should be free to trade in parts of their body if they wish. After all, who owns them if not the individual making use of them?

      You don't get it at all. And it is getting really creepy.

      You know, it seams that you think everyone earning a decent wage is trying to stash every penny they get, are miserly tippers, and never help anyone else. No doubt there are people like that. Perhaps you think people are like that because you are like that

      If I were like that, I would be looking for an overpaid job in some other country where the taxes are lower so that I can stash away every penny ... oh wait, this does sound familiar.

      But, you see, the people who shun Mr. Greedy...Rents would only be the ones who felt that he was mean or unfair, and the more (or less) that number is, the more (or less) inconvenient his life would be made. Sounds like a nicely balancing system.

      No it doesn't. If he were to abuse horribly a few people, he would still have a pretty fair chance to never face retribution. A system used by crooks for ages.

      I pay my part-time housekeeper more than she asks (about double minimum wage) in line with the market. I routinely tip 20-25% to waitstaff, and, as the "holiday season" rolls around, I'm particularly obvious in demonstrating charity to my kids over and above my usual contribution levels -- $20 into a Sally Ann kettle on a whim is typical for me....

      The ghosts of Christmas Past, Present and Yet to Come have been visiting?

      This is not to "easy my concience"

      I've heard of many things but an idea of "easy conscience" is new to me. Must be some Objectivist/libertatian thing. A conscience completely devoid of altruism, probably. Since you mentioned Alissa Zinovievna Rosenbaum ... err ... Ayn Rand ... and her opus magnum, "Atlas Shrugged" I can only assume you subscribe to her style of conscience: non existant kind.

      But, I don't like to be considered "Mr. Greedy...Rents", so while I like to live well, and save for a rainy day, I do make a concious effort to "spread the wealth" to a reasonable degree.

      You remind me of a Victorian Lord tossing a few silver coins out of the window of his gilded carriage to some diseased wretches in rags on the street and calling it "charity".

      The thing is, together, our voluntary, collective efforts add up to far more than I ever saw governments in Canada accomplish.

      I am sure of it. Last time I heard the Government still refused to send those very polite men, going "Si Senor" and bowing constantly, holding their hats in hand, when they cut loans and polish cars to every gated "community". What a band of no good, lazy "thieves" of your hard-erned money! Not even a proper caddy boy to carry your golf clubs around! Completely outrageous! But you and your friends could accomplish that and much more in no time flat!

      Like all thieves who encounter an unwilling victim, you see me as a sociopathic amoral monster.

      There we go again, the dude gets his education thanks to taxpayers and then whines about them being thieves! Of his money!

      There is no hope for you.

      If by that you mean that there is no hope of me ever becoming like you, I take that as a compliment.

      Pity Canada.

      No need. We are doing quite fine without you. No doubt to your never ending confusion and resentment.

    74. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      You don't get it at all. And it is getting really creepy.

      No, I don't. Please explain again how it is "creepy" that a person should own their body?

      No it doesn't. If he were to abuse horribly a few people, he would still have a pretty fair chance to never face retribution.

      Sounds like a "democratic" mob enslaving the productive to me, you know, "the few"?

      the dude gets his education thanks to taxpayers

      Of which I was in well in excess of 100% of the contributor toward anything I received. Funny how everyone else is the poor "taxpayer" except the one paying the most taxes!

      You remind me of a Victorian Lord tossing a few silver coins out of the window of his gilded carriage to some diseased wretches in rags on the street and calling it "charity".

      Would that I'd be such a lord. Instead of contributing toward hundreds of pounds of food, I might be able to contribute towards tens of thousands. How many hundreds of pounds of food did you give to the poor this week? month? year? No government is going to decide how much or how little I help others, or which others I help. I took 10 kids off the street and put them in school last month in Rwanda. What did you do? You paid your taxes. And that did what, exactly? Are you sure? Can't be too sure what with all those sponsorship scandals and all, eh?

      If money corrupts so much why is the richest man in the world (or one of the top few, depending on the US$ exchange rate), spending so much to eradicate Malaria? What is any government doing about it?

      You have a twisted view of the world, where everyone who succeeds is presumed to have exploited someone else. Ya know, perhaps I should fire my lawn care people, dismiss my housekeeper, and give the money used to pay them to the government. They'd surely be better off without the money they earn with the "social services" they'd get instead, right?

      --
      You could've hired me.
    75. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Do you really thing that clumsy is better?

      That is not a question of "better". It is a question of your relative importance in the scheme of things. Which is not a very great one.

      I suppose you think that electrical engineers also produce "fluff", after all they don't produce food.

      In the relative scheme of things, they are (along with the grid workers) way ahead of you.

      I've been financially independent since about 14.

      Oh goodey, he started paying taxes at 14! If you keep this up, we are going to learn about that giant software corporation, employing thousands of people you started at the ripe age of 3.

      But up until then, it was my father who was taxed severely, who provided support for me.

      No, he paid his taxes for the roads he used, the medicare he used and the police that protected him etc. You got an advance, against your future taxes, on account of being a child.

      In the mid 1970s my mother had to return to work just to pay our growing tax burden!

      The bullshit is getting real thick. I can see how someone coming from a family of fibbers and "me poor victim, everyones is robbing me!" whiners could inhereit the attitude. For your information, dumbass, there was never a time in Canadian history when what you say would be true. While on the other hand, there was a global economic down-turn just around the time of Trudeau. Taxation had nothing to do with that whatsoever. But those who loathe to pay their share, will always find some whiny excuse not to. And so will their children.

      And, they arrived in Canada as refugees, with nothing, at a time when there was no assistance for such refugees other than being allowed admittance.

      Oh things are getting clear now. Not only did Canada graciously take the bastards in they were not satisifed with the Canadian standards! How dare these pesky Canadians do that?! I mean didn't they know they were dealing with royalty?! As someone on this thread already mentioned, you were never a Canadian, nor were your parents. Your vile attitude is just too jarringly foreign to us.

      Certainly no welfare. (My father had to work off that admittance by working as a farm hand in Manitoba for nothing more than room and board)

      That only happens in the case of "economic refugees" or some other sneaks who get in here to make a buck. Specially in Canada which has one of the most lavish refugee programs around. Which is quite consistent with their and your attitudes. No wonder Canadians are becoming more weary of immigrants as time goes on. I used to argue for multi-cultural Canada with a fair share of grateful refugees, willing to become rightful members of our society, to propagate our values and create and share our wealth but upon discovering the kind of "refugee" your parents where, I am having serious doubts. Perhaps some test is in order or something.

      When he got sick, he had private health insurance in the 1950s (working for RCA Victor at the time).

      Oh yea, was it not you here before whining how your father was horribly served by them nasty socialized medicare commies and how wonderful and joyous his services were before in the pay-for-play medicine? Not that he got older and his body was falling apart later on or anything and not like these nasty were not capable of magic, they just spitefully refused to use their pixie dust on him or something along these lines. Didn't I debunk your whining once already? I can't remember, so many drooling trolls, so little time.

      Matter of fact, things went well for them, working hard, until Trudeau put that damn social safety net into high-gear and started to tax them in spades.

      Ah yes, the famous Trudeau global economic crisis of the 1970s. They still swear revenge down in Nepal over that one.

      No, we owe Canada nothing that hasn't been "paid back" many times over, culminating with the death of my father at the hands of a health care system that didn't w

    76. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Obviously not for healthcare alone. With more than $1200 a month taxation overall.

      No, it was health alone. Quote you: Yes, even if I had to pay it out of pocket, it would be cheaper

      Cheaper. As in you get more for the same amount of money. So that in order to get the same as you, the Canadians would have to pay more money. Or is basic logic too hard for you?

      The point is, that even paying $1200 a month for health insurance, my tax burden in the U.S. is so much lower that I'd still be ahead.

      As I said, this could possibly only apply to the 150K+ personal income bracket in Canada, i.e the top 1% or so.

      Now, six figures might sound like a big income, but realize that it provides for all the needs of four people. A 25-30k income is not that much.

      No the $1200 we discussed was always per person. The whole thread is about insurance per person. Or is your lying web getting too tangled?

    77. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      No, I don't. Please explain again how it is "creepy" that a person should own their body?

      Basic ethics 101 is somewhat beyond the scope or capability of a Slashdot thread. Suffice to say that carving one's body parts out of desperation for money is not generally counted amongst enlightened activities in civilised societies.

      Sounds like a "democratic" mob enslaving the productive to me, you know, "the few"?

      Next thing, at the apex of hypocrisy, you are going to count yourself amongst the "productive".

      Of which I was in well in excess of 100% of the contributor toward anything I received. Funny how everyone else is the poor "taxpayer" except the one paying the most taxes!

      Your fibs are getting so thick that I am losing track, when did that tax paying start? At 18 at the earliest. When did you leave? At 23? 25? Lets hear how that "in excess of 100%" was possible.

      I took 10 kids off the street and put them in school last month in Rwanda.

      Whcih you flew on your flying carpet to the Tax Free Land where Rivers Run of Milk and Honey. Or something of the sort. Just for your information, your chest beating combined with incessant fibbing and complete lack of moral fiber rendered your credibility somewhat, slightly south of zero.

      spending so much to eradicate Malaria?

      Many possible reasons. Pangs of guilt. Tax breaks. Ego and legacy building, i.e. see Rockefeller, Carnegie and Vanderbilt. And possibly the wee fact that his unjstified hoarding of all that wealth, in all likelyhood was, in some part, responsible for the governments not having any to spend on that. One might ask just how much, say, Rwanda's impoverished government paid to Microsoft. Just a thought.

      You have a twisted view of the world, where everyone who succeeds is presumed to have exploited someone else.

      That is untrue. But success and gigiantic wealth are not one and the same. Gigiantic wealth and hoarding money "success" do not make. There is another, much more important ingredient in success. One that makes this woman more successful then Bill Gates will ever be, by far, and that coming from an atheist should tell you something. Tommy Douglas was a very successful man. Conrad Black was not. You see a pattern? Can you tell that ingredient?

      Ya know, perhaps I should fire my lawn care people, dismiss my housekeeper, and give the money used to pay them to the government. They'd surely be better off without the money they earn with the "social services" they'd get instead, right?

      In a sane society, you would be cutting your own lawn (or having neighbourhood kids do it for pocket money) and these people would be doing some meaningful work somewhere else, where they can get quaint things like retirement benefits, which I am sure you will not provide to any of them (nor they can afford to save for them), the great phillantorpist that you are.

    78. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Suffice to say that carving one's body parts out of desperation for money is not generally counted amongst enlightened activities in civilised societies.

      On the contrary. Carving other people's body parts out of desparation for them is not generally an enlightened activity (and neither is robbing them of their earnings, for that matter), but one's own? Why not? Because it hurts? Because it can be fatal? Because, after death, it can provide a better life for one's progeny? As to civilized, what has living in cities got to do with it?

      Next thing, at the apex of hypocrisy, you are going to count yourself amongst the "productive".

      Actually, yes. At least the people who pay me seam to think so.

      Your fibs are getting so thick that I am losing track, when did that tax paying start? At 18 at the earliest. When did you leave? At 23? 25? Lets hear how that "in excess of 100%" was possible.

      Well, I certainly paid taxes on employment income at 14 in 1975, -- I was contracting my services as a BASIC Programmer, and later Assembly language programmer, of all things. Got paid pretty well too, actually. Prior to that I had savings which were earning in excess of the tax-free $1,000 interest limit (that got canned along the way), so I was paying tax on those. But, in terms of "paying my way" in excess of what I received, that started around 14. Prior to that, Dad payed my way with his earnings. See, Dad believed that I was old enough to pay for room and board by that time. I left in 1997, at the ripe old age of 36, having paid quite a few hundreds of thousands of dollars in income tax, and seeing the deterioration of Canada's social services since Trudeau's heyday. I heard that taxes have gone down a bit since, but a brief return from January 2003 to May, 2004 proved that they hadn't gone down much, and services had gone into the sewer: Metro Toronto had a shortage of 1400 doctors, and the local school didn't even sand or salt their parking lots.

      Whcih you flew on your flying carpet to the Tax Free Land where Rivers Run of Milk and Honey

      Well, no, I didn't have the resources to do that. But, through this organization, I was able to do quite a bit of good. $50 a kid times 5 kids times 2 (employer match). No magic carpet rides, though. So shoot me for not helping them all.

      In a sane society, you would be cutting your own lawn (or having neighbourhood kids do it for pocket money) and these people would be doing some meaningful work somewhere else.

      Well, they are free to pursue better work elsewhere. Apparently, they can't, at least not in the short term. My housekeeper is quite likely to do better than the $15 an hour I pay her, and I hope she does. Should I just cut them off, then? As for the 'hood rats, well, they can't be bothered. I have paid local kids to mow my lawn in the past. But, the whole pruning, and weeding, business is generally beyond their skill. See, I have this Old World rose that needs care...

      --
      You could've hired me.
    79. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Cheaper. As in you get more for the same amount of money.

      Cheaper, as in living here is cheaper, overall. I suppose I should have made overall clearer. Many Canadians tell me they are afraid of having to pay several hundred dollars a month for health insurance if they work in the U.S. I tell them life is "still cheaper", given the taxes they'd save.

      No the $1200 we discussed was always per person.

      I don't recall saing it was per person. I recall saying it was what my employer paid.

      That was for family coverage.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    80. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      No, he paid his taxes for the roads he used, the medicare he used and the police that protected him etc.

      And, like I cover the expenses of my spouse and children, he covered the expenses of his. In fact, at the time, up until about 1973 or so, there was little in the way of social services in Canada, compared to the status quo.

      Specially in Canada which has one of the most lavish refugee programs around.

      They certainly didn't post-WWII. Look back in history. No further back. 1948 or so.

      ...you were never a Canadian...

      That much I will agree with: I do not believe in stealing from the productive members of society to provide cable TV and subsidized rent to welfare lardasses in the name of feeding hungry children.

      ...these nasty were not capable of magic,...

      Magic, what magic? Oh, you mean AAA repair surgery, which was rather routine, though still risky in the U.S. at the time, though which no Canadian surgeon could perform? Yup, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

      My parents came to Canada with nothing but the clothes on their backs, to a place with no support for refugees at the time other than admitance to work farms and domestic servants, worked like sons and daughters of bitches to rebuild a fraction of what Nazis and Soviet communists had stolen from them, and when they achieved that goal, through nothing more than the sweat of their brows, they get taxed to high heaven to "help the less fortunate"? Who the fuck helped them? No one. And, surprisingly, they didn't need government help: there was the opportunity and charity that I provide today to others. A hard life, perhaps, but a noble and rewarding one, if the socialists would just get out of the way.

      If they, barely speaking English, could pick themselves up by the bootstraps and make a decent life for themselves, then let the welfare lardasses do the same. I for one will not be fooled, cheated and robbed the way they were.

      My mother had maids at her disposal and ended up as one herself. Still, with no welfare, she did well... Until the damn bastard socialists forced her back to work to help pay my father's increasing taxes.

      You know, in Texas, it is legal to kill adult trespassers after dark, minors too, if they are threating or armed. I can only hope the likes of people like you find themselves down there on a dark night, and stop to ask for directions at the "wrong" house. People like you are truely vile and deserve all the bad karma they can attract.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    81. Re:Income tax misnomer by Chemical+Serenity · · Score: 2, Informative
      I wonder, then, why more doctors are coming back to Canada than going south.

      Or perhaps you havn't been paying attention?

      A quote:

      Dr. Andrew Johnson, an infectious diseases specialist, said he left Canada six years ago to pursue his career in the U.S.

      "At the time it was really just the opportunity to perform research," he told CTV News.

      Now with two children of his own, Johnson has returned to live in Calgary.

      "Canada is a great place to raise children and has a good education system," he said. "We don't have quite the same problems like violence and hand guns."
      Which brings us full circle to the point of the article. Obviously, Canada has attractions that money can't buy. A general sense of safety, for instance, as exemplified by the people coming home. Thus it's wise (election posturing or no) to give additional incentives to people worthy of being here. Combine that with higher median per-houshold income, not having to worry about declaring bankruptcy if you happen to get sick (oh yes, did you know that half of the bankruptcies in the US are medically related, and that 75% of those bankrupts HAD INSURANCE? Some great coverage, there!), a socially liberal atmosphere and not being in a country that has a leader threatening to veto anti-torture legislation.... well, Canada's lookin' pretty good these days.

      Not that it'd matter much to you "Hate Canada First" types.

      --
      "People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
    82. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      but one's own? Why not? Because it hurts? Because it can be fatal?

      No, because, Mr. Oblivious, it would result in the poor nearly all missing kidneys, ligaments, lungs, bone marrow, parts of intestines and whatever else. It would result in women selling their scalps to old but rich witches, young men to old ones etc and so on. It would result in impoverished women selling their bodies and dying in the process so that their children can have food for the next year or so and thus have some chance of survivial. It would result in a mass influx of body parts from Africa and Asia to the US because a $100 is a fortune in some village in Cambodia. And so on an so forth. It is an arrogant, dog-eat-dog idea, meant for the wealthy to be using other people as spare parts because of their financial situation. I can't believe I have to be explaining this. It is paramount to trading in human life. On the other hand this probably explains why the whole question of Medicare and many other things, have such terrifyingly selfish and egoistic tone with you and why matters of most basic decency escape you completely.

      but a brief return from January 2003 to May, 2004 proved that they hadn't gone down much, and services had gone into the sewer: Metro Toronto had a shortage of 1400 doctors,

      Caused by increase in training time, erroneous reduction of training spots in the 1990s when there was a surplus, immigration restrictions and only 3% due to brain-drain. Also the number itself is highly questionable and debatable. Loosening the immigration quotas alone would increase supply by 22% according to this, speedier training by another 24%. That is in addition to increases in funding already in the system.

      Prior to that I had savings which were earning in excess of the tax-free $1,000 interest limit

      Right. You had savings by age of 14 which earned more then $1,000 in interest. A really fat piggie bank, that you needed a front loader to move. The discussion really ends here as it is futile debating spoiled, priviledged brats who have no clue how life works for most people. All that whining and victimhood complexes of yours and your father's should have been a clear warning sign of greed monkeys at large.

      and the local school didn't even sand or salt their parking lots.

      I am sure that had a lot to do with the budgets and not anything to do with the anti-salt crusade which has been sweeping major cities for some time now. Perhaps they used sand as everybody else seems to be nowadays (as to shut the rusty car owners up and another thing, supposedly to prevent concrete from crumbling).

      Should I just cut them off, then?

      No, you should pay plentiful taxes to a sane, civilised government so that your taking advantage of them today can be at least partially recompensed to them when they need medical care or help when they get old. You probably think that you are doing them great favours by paying them somewhat more then the least possible minimum and not realising that it is only a stop-gap and ultimately very selfish meeasure as it leaves them completely dependant on your whim and their own good health.

    83. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Oh, you mean AAA repair surgery, which was rather routine, though still risky in the U.S. at the time, though which no Canadian surgeon could perform?

      Translation: they refused to pay for an expermental procedure, whose actual applicability to the case is entirely of your own making post-facto and therefore extremely questionable when compared to that of the doctors at the time. They also failed to run him through the prototype, semi-functional CT scan machine somewhere at some lab down at MIT, why, those commie-penny-pinching bastards! But of course, it had to be their fault! Why your father could not have just had an uncureable at that time disease, never! It doesn't happen to superior, God-chosen people like you and your family members! Only commie-pinko-MDs in Canada could have conspired to assasinate him, by devious means of failing to develop clairvoyance and time travel!

      worked like sons and daughters of bitches to rebuild a fraction of what Nazis and Soviet communists had stolen from them, and when they achieved that goal, through nothing more than the sweat of their brows,

      What exactly needed "rebuilding" around here?

      Who the fuck helped them? No one.

      Err, I seem to recall faintly, somewhere in your frothing narrative, something about a country called Canada taking them in with nothing but clothes on their backs, or I could be wrong.

      A hard life, perhaps, but a noble and rewarding one, if the socialists would just get out of the way.

      I am quite convinced by now that Canada should not have let them in and left all that pleasure of their presence to the real Communists. Who I am sure would have been really impressed.

      If they, barely speaking English, could pick themselves up by the bootstraps and make a decent life for themselves, then let the welfare lardasses do the same. I for one will not be fooled, cheated and robbed the way they were.

      I know, you will focus on fooling, robbing and cheating others yourself personally instead. You are quite advanced along that way already. But I am quite glad that I get to watch this from afar. US citizens watch out though.

      My mother had maids at her disposal and ended up as one herself.

      Whiney, aristocratic, spoiled brats for generations it seems. She probably tried to order around these "unsufferable Canadian peasants" on arrival and was greatly surprised they did not obey in an instant.

      Still, with no welfare, she did well... Until the damn bastard socialists forced her back to work to help pay my father's increasing taxes.

      Yes, I can just see that. Trudeau had conspired personally to do it at the 1st Congress of Canadian Communist Party in Ottawa when they hammered out their 5-year Collectivisation of Means of Production plan. As I said, the famous 1970s Trudeau global economics, complete with that nasty Arab, Trudeau al Quebeq, being responsible for the OPEC oil-crisis.

      You know, in Texas, it is legal to kill adult trespassers after dark, minors too, if they are threating or armed. I can only hope the likes of people like you find themselves down there on a dark night, and stop to ask for directions at the "wrong" house. People like you are truely vile and deserve all the bad karma they can attract.

      Finally the true you shines through all that smoke and mirrors about charity and kindness to neighbours. A wacko, rabid, greedy in the extreme, egoistical, sociopathic maniac with an M16 and probably a family pitbull, shooting people for "tresspassing" on his, I mean HIS! HIS and NOONE ELSES! HIS alone and you fuckers all dont come near or I will blow your brains out! You hear!! Property.

      And no, I do not plan to visit the apparently very hospitable state of Texas. Too many insane, armed and dangerous animals like you roaming unchained. But if you keep this up, I have a feeling that your children will be, sooner or later, having this conversation on some future In

    84. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I don't recall saing it was per person. I recall saying it was what my employer paid.

      The top of the thread:

      You did, of course, not being a disingenious shill, include the $200-600 (depending on employment type/other factors) a month health insurance per-person in the household in the US equation

      Your reply:

      In my case, the cost of our health coverage is more like $1200 a month, but my employer covers all of it...

      This implies that you are talking about the $1200 a month in the context of the original post, since you did not specify otherwise.

      Many Canadians tell me they are afraid of having to pay several hundred dollars a month for health insurance if they work in the U.S. I tell them life is "still cheaper", given the taxes they'd save.

      Not after you factor in, the apparently necessary, from your responses, M16s, barbed wire and pitbulls.

      And no, I don't even pretend to take you seriously anymore.

    85. Re:Income tax misnomer by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Hello

      According to CDC, about 23% of all deaths are due to cancer, so I don't understand your comment.

      Eventually everybody dies and is so subjet at some point to some pretty catastrophic health problem. The objective of a "civilised" society should to be able to treat everybody for every condition with the best care available. This is an ideal of course, but your proposal seems to me like "Sorry dear sir/madam, you've got some pretty serious condition. We could treat you and you would have some chance of recovery, but you can't pay for the care and it is not covered by insurance or health care. You can now go home to die".

      To me that sounds pretty unacceptable, given that some nations seem to be able to cope with the problem with a better approach than the US.

    86. Re:Income tax misnomer by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      This is far and away the most precious flame war I've seen in years.

      Thank you. Thank you both! I'm certainly bookmarking this exchange.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    87. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      People like IgnoramusMaximus are rampant, and probably in the majority in Canada. They will democratically preside over its downfall.

      But, the bigger lesson is how compassion, community, and charity can be perverted slowly over time and turned into the chains of socialism. If it can happen in Canada, it can certainly happen in the U.S., and it would be arrogant to think otherwise.

      I fully expect the Dems to sweep into power in 2008, what with the mess the neocons have made. And that is scary. I can only hope that Americans look at Canada's mistakes and do not repeat them. Canadians, of course, tend to spend too much time lookng "down south" down their holier than thow noses, to ever learn what works.

      He (she?) is right about one thing, though: I was never "really" a Canadian, despite being born there -- I believe in individual liberty too much and so am attracted to the U.S. on the basis of its founding principles even if the present administration tramples them. In effect, I feel stateless and am seeking a place to call home.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    88. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Right. You had savings by age of 14 which earned more then $1,000 in interest. A really fat piggie bank

      Interest rates on savings accounts were in excess of 10% at the time.

      There is something wrong with a child (or more likely that child's parents) that can not save $10,000 in birthday money, Xmas money, government child credit payments (if the parents accept them), allowance, newspaper route (they still existed back then), etc. in the first 14 years of their life.

      If parents can't help their kids get a bit of a head start in life, they should not have kids.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    89. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I swear IgnoramusMaximus, if there was anyone stupider then you - Id be hard placed to name him. Your language shows that your more on par with a chimp then a actual human. Between your ideology and your language, its fairly certain your just about the stupidest fuck Ive seen on this site.

      Ah yes, the outraged indignation of an injured selfish ego. Music to my ears. Its all there: complete lack of any substantive argument, epithets and cowardice. Wait, the threats of violence are missing! Tsk, Tsk! You gotta work on that one, Mr, Coward, Anonymous. I know that your indignation at my insolence brought you out, unwisely, from your mision of moderating every second post on Slashdot "Overrated" so maybe you just should go back to that past-time. Might as well, as you are bringing as much to the discussion doing that as posting, trust me on this one. Watch out for metamoderators though. Karma is a bitch, you know.

    90. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      This is far and away the most precious flame war I've seen in years. Thank you. Thank you both! I'm certainly bookmarking this exchange.

      Why, thank you. I just hope that amidst all that low-brow (I admit, I try to play at the level of my opponents -- its quite fun and actually works!) entertainment, you found something of educational value. Sometimes, in my rare and brief moments of hopeful for the future thought, I fantasize that there are some people who do not understand what this new generation of greed worshipers is all about, and who do not think through the implications of what these mindless hoarders of "trinkets and baubles" want, and that I somehow, mostly accidentally, play some small part in opening some incidental reader's eyes to the unspeakable horrors which these minions of Mammon have in store for all of us.

      I too will try to keep this bookmarked, for that "free organ trade" tidbit alone should give some serious pause to anyone with half a brain.

    91. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      There is something wrong with a child (or more likely that child's parents) that can not save $10,000 in birthday money, Xmas money, government child credit payments (if the parents accept them), allowance, newspaper route (they still existed back then), etc. in the first 14 years of their life. If parents can't help their kids get a bit of a head start in life, they should not have kids.

      Thank you! I will have this quote pasted-in every time anyone starts developing any illusions as to practicality and common sense of the libertarian thought. I will take out, of course, that too-late-coming weasel phrase "or more likely that child's parents" as it is clearly an after-thought, added because you realised that without it something in the vicinity of 99% of Canadians (and probably a similar percentage of US kids) would not qualify. And yet it was, beyond any doubt, the very course of events in your spoiled childhood.

    92. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      ...your spoiled childhood

      Spoiled?

      Gee, Dad started out in Canada as a farm hand, and Mom was a maid.

      Spoiled? I don't f-ing thing so.

      They literally had all their assets wiped out, and started over with but clothes on their backs, with no social assistance what so ever. In fact, there were admitted into the very "servant class" that you so claim to want to protect from the likes of me.

      With nothing but perseverance, they managed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps to the point where they could eventually buy a small house in the countryside when I was born (it was a shack, really), and Mom could quit work to raise me. They moved out of a 1 room apartment into the upper half of a duplex in a part of town that actually had tree-lined streets and front yards. Of course, to save to be able to reach this point, they had no TV, stereo, car, and certainly didn't take annual vacations. The TV and car came later (and the luxery of Cable when I was five years old!) but my father didn't start to take vacations until he was around 55.

      Spoiled? I hardly think so. I remember well a digital watch that my father saved an entire year for, so that I might have it for Christmas. It was my only present that year. What I did have was an abundance of the teachings of a strong work ethic, something that is sorely lacking today.

      I am a Libertarian precisely because I saw them succeed, starting from nothing, with no government help, and in 20 short years enter the ranks of the middle class, from those of the abject poor refugee "servant" class. Not bad for effort expended over a generation.

      Their suffering started precisely when government started to help the poor.

      If anyone is spoiled, it is you, what with your "social safety net", "state employment insurance", and "universal health care", paid for by my, and before me my father's' blood and toil.

      Tell ya what, throw it all away, everyting you own, forgoe any government servivces, work to get it all back, and then come and talk to me. Until then, you are the worst form of social disease there exists: the liberal parasite. Ann Coulter is right to title her book, "Treason".

      --
      You could've hired me.
    93. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      In effect, I feel stateless and am seeking a place to call home.

      Perhaps Uzbekistan or Khazakhstan will evolve into something to your liking. Or maybe Liberia. In the meantime, here is that old explanation Mike Huben once wrote:

      # We can't emigrate because there is no libertarian nation.

      Yes, you can emigrate, just as you could buy a different car even though your favorite company doesn't produce cars which let you travel at the speed of sound and get 2000 mpg. Even if nobody produces EXACTLY what you want, you can choose any car the market produces or you create yourself.

      There are roughly 200 nations to which you could emigrate. They are the product of an anarcho-capitalist free market: there is no over-government dictating to those sovereign nations. Indeed, the only difference between the anarchy of nations and libertopia is that anarcho-capitalists are wishing for a smaller granularity. These nations have found that it is most cost-efficient to defend themselves territorially.

      If any other market provided 200 choices, libertarians would declare that the sacred workings of the market blessed whatever choices were offered. The point is that choices do exist: it's up to libertarians to show that there is something wrong with the market of nations in a way they would accept being applied to markets within nations.

      Libertaria is a combination of values that just doesn't exist: the government equivalent of a really posh residence for very little money. You can find nations which have much lower taxes, etc.: just don't expect them to be first class.

      And the reason these combinations don't exist is probably simple: the free market of government services essentially guarantees that there is no such thing as the free lunch libertarians want. It's not competitive.
    94. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Aside from the falacy that libertarians want a free lunch, this is precisely the reasoning that brought me to the U.S.: of all possible places to go, it was closest to what I wanted.

      In fact, if the Republicans keep f*cking up, and the Democrats continue to look wishy-washy, 2008 might bring in some big Libertarian gains: fiscal conservatism together with bitch-slapping the religeous right, anti-gay, anti-pot doofii (doofuses?)

      --
      You could've hired me.
    95. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Gee, Dad started out in Canada as a farm hand, and Mom was a maid

      I don't believe any of that crap. This is the classic Baron Munchausen "I pulled myself and my horse out of the swamp by my own hair" story, which is one of the requisite fabrications of any divinely-annointed, aristocractic, elitist and supremely greedy dynasty. Why, you will not find any two-bit prince or a princelet who would not say the very same words about his "noble" grandfather (who in reality stole, pillaged and raped his marry way across the land). In your case, I am absoultely convinced that the defintion of "only clothes on their backs" somehow missed a few coffers full of jewelery and objects of fine art. Which later proved instrumental in the "hard work" "bringing them out of poverty". The "farm hand" experience, most likely involved purchasing the farm in question. The "maid" work, managing tea parties for fellow emigree aristocracy or something of the sort. Whatever it was, it is virtually guaranteed to be as unlike your description of "hard work" as humanely possible. Although I will grant your the "perseverance" part, as it is ususal for "nobles" whose asses were trounced down a few rungs of the social ladder to be really tenacious about getting back up on top. Apparently something about an addiction to dominating others.

      With nothing but perseverance, they managed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps to the point where they could eventually buy a small house in the countryside when I was born (it was a shack, really), and Mom could quit work to raise me. They moved out of a 1 room apartment into the upper half of a duplex in a part of town that actually had tree-lined streets and front yards. Of course, to save to be able to reach this point, they had no TV, stereo, car, and certainly didn't take annual vacations. The TV and car came later (and the luxery of Cable when I was five years old!) but my father didn't start to take vacations until he was around 55.

      You forgot the "walking 17 miles in the snow up to his waist to work, and back, uphill both ways" part. Otherwise a good effort, as these fables go, keep it up.

      Spoiled? I hardly think so. I remember well a digital watch that my father saved an entire year for, so that I might have it for Christmas. It was my only present that year. What I did have was an abundance of the teachings of a strong work ethic, something that is sorely lacking today.

      Err, you could try to throw in that bit about your sick mother sharing selflessly the last piece of dried up bread and water with you, after the pinko-commie-medicare-MDs (led by Trudeau himself, personally) raided the place on your 3rd birthday and took your cake (for which your father worked the whole previous week 3-shifts everyday) along with all the food in the house. But they left the Bible and the US Constitution behind and thus your father could draw from them the abundance of teachings to pass on, gingerly, onto his offspring, so unjsustly treated by the foul country which dared to take them in .... err .. trap them! Yea, that's the ticket!

      I am a Libertarian precisely because I saw them succeed, starting from nothing, with no government help, and in 20 short years enter the ranks of the middle class, from those of the abject poor refugee "servant" class. Not bad for effort expended over a generation.

      No you are a Libertarian because you are a sociopathic, greedy, egoistical, spoiled brat. The rest is pure boloney.

      Their suffering started precisely when government started to help the poor.

      Three cheers for the Black-masked Trudeau Libertarian Suppression Brigade. They were a bit like a cross of Zorro and Robin Hood. Except for the mules instead of horses. And toilet plungers. A truly fearsome, libertarian-oppressing fighting force, if you ask me.

      If anyone is spoiled, it is you, what with your "social safety net", "state employment insurance", and "universal health care", paid f

    96. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Aside from the falacy that libertarians want a free lunch,

      That is precisely what you want. You want to have a functional society with no social contract of any kind whatsoever and with your contributions to its institutions based purely on your whim.

    97. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      The only institutions that should exist are those that can attract enough voluntary support to survive. Rather like the guy in the sleazy part of town selling porn mags -- if he can't sell enough, that's his tough luck. Sell bibles instead.

      You are suggesting that a mob, perhaps a democratic mob (that is one that represents over 50% of the population) is moral in using force to get what it wants from everyone else. That is precisely what I reject. Without my consent, taking from me is immoral. Taxation is immoral, as it is just mob theft.

      Now there may very well be practical reasons to voluntarily support certain "institutions": hungry people might get angry and it may be cheaper to feed them than to spend the money on bullets to kill them when they come to rob me. But, don't let them breed.

      Furthermore, cooperative insurance is usually a good idea to mitigate unforseen disasters that might be rare, but devastating for an individual.

      Finally, a cooperative may enjoy economies of scale sufficient to subsidise a certain percentage of "free riders", and still be the best deal going. If that's true then it will arise naturally. (In practice large insurers buy smaller ones until there are a few big ones, for this reason). The wise insured would want the large insurers to be cooperatives.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    98. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Good lord, they must have some good "bud" up there in Canada these days for you to post that drivel. Enjoy your fantasy.

      While you're at it, I suggest you read Alex Doulis' "Take Your Money and Run," and "My Blue Haven", if you have the stomach for them. Warning: even the conservative Diane Francis found them alarmingly renegade.

      What my parents had which helped them succeed was a community of others in the same boat that worked cooperatively, and not as a band of thugs seeking to rob those they perceived as "rich": Franz was a doctor, Josef a tailer, Marie a seamstress, Angelica a miliner, Hannah a cook, etc.: they often helped one another gratis, while selling their services at market rates to the Westmount upper class (research a bit on post-WWII demographics). But, they did not seek a handout, and they did not tolerate a freeloader: shunning was quite effective.

      It was they, not your ilk that built Canada after WWII, and you have the gaul to call them thieves?

      It is a pity that I am agnostic, for I have no faith that would admit the possibiluty of a god to send a lightning bolt to fry you where you sit.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    99. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      What my parents had which helped them succeed was a community of others in the same boat that worked cooperatively, and not as a band of thugs seeking to rob those they perceived as "rich": Franz was a doctor, Josef a tailer, Marie a seamstress, Angelica a miliner, Hannah a cook, etc.: they often helped one another gratis, while selling their services at market rates to the Westmount upper class (research a bit on post-WWII demographics). But, they did not seek a handout, and they did not tolerate a freeloader: shunning was quite effective.

      In other words (taking this persecution complex, Baron Munchausen crap at face value) they run a commune, although I am sure that you are going to swear up and down that it was a "free market capitalist" society. Or perheaps Joseph, Franz, Angelica and Hannah ended up voting for Trudeau, and only your "blue blood" parents were the black sheep who ended up getting "shunned" for their uncureable greed, which would explain your great bitterness and subsequent departure.

      It was they, not your ilk that built Canada after WWII, and you have the gaul to call them thieves?

      Whoa, Nelly! Post WWII Canada was built by many, many people, those who were here long before WWII with the help of quite a few immigrants, most of whom were and are liberals. Hint: Trudeau did not vote himself in against the wishes of the majority of Canadians.

      It is quite telling though of your self-centered, self-aggrandising, superiority complex attitude to claim that somehow a small band of immigrants, due to their inherent superiority, was single-handedly responsible for the post WWII success of Canada. I know what is coming next in this delusion: and then they were "robbed" by the great mob of the rest of Canadians (95% of whom, according to the general tone of your rants, were at that time welfare bums and another 4%, or so, the Westmount upper class).

      Also, who called who a thief? I seem to recall you being rather adamant about it, on several occasions. I merely pointed out your, and by your own admission, your fathers, great hostility towards taxation in general. As to their financial status upon entry to Canada, it is your own claim of membership in aristocracy which I merely took to its logical conclusion.

    100. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      The only institutions that should exist are those that can attract enough voluntary support to survive. Rather like the guy in the sleazy part of town selling porn mags -- if he can't sell enough, that's his tough luck. Sell bibles instead.

      Right, that will work wonders. Lemme see, you and 22013 families in your city pay for the police. But some, "I have better things to do with my money", 1231 or so do not. Someone is getting mugged on the street, a cop sees it and goes: "Police! The victim, please recite your Police subsciption number so that I know if I can help you!". That is assuming that the victim happened to be paying for the Blue Police LLC, Precint 54 as opposed to Red Police Inc. Sector 4 where he lives.

      You are suggesting that a mob, perhaps a democratic mob (that is one that represents over 50% of the population) is moral in using force to get what it wants from everyone else.

      No, turkey, it is 95% or so of the citizenry (Libertarians are luckily a rather rare aberration around here) decides that in order to participate in the deal called "Canada" one has to submit to certain obligations. This process is called a Social Contract. Which, among other things, involves payment for the national institutions. The contract is voluntary. You do not like it? You can take your ass to Belize or wherever there is no taxes. No one is going to stop you. But if you do submit to the contract, it will be enforced. No signing of any paperwork is needed. The acceptance of the contract and staying in the deal called "Canada" are synonymous. I hear they have a similar deal called the "US of A".

      That is precisely what I reject. Without my consent, taking from me is immoral.

      As I said, the deal is voluntary. You can leave at any time. As a matter of fact, this precisely what you did. Subsequently any whining, moaning and bitching about it being "without your consent" is just that. Childlish moaning of a spoiled brat who does not get his way.

      Taxation is immoral, as it is just mob theft.

      See above. It you were prevented from leaving, then you would have a point. But you do not.

      Now there may very well be practical reasons to voluntarily support certain "institutions": hungry people might get angry and it may be cheaper to feed them than to spend the money on bullets to kill them when they come to rob me. But, don't let them breed.

      This is how it would look like in practice: a network of "communities" walled in by 20 feet tall barb-wire topped walls with guard towers, machine gun emplacements and other "security" measures, surrounded by squalid shanty-towns full of millions of impoverished people, seething with hate and resentment. All kept in check by ruthless private armies in direct employ of these "city-states". And so on. What escapes you (and no surprise there) is that this shit has already been tried on multiple occasions, with disastrous results every and each time. Our Social Contracts (Canadian, US, Frech, German and many other varieties) are the direct result of those experiences.

      Finally, a cooperative may enjoy economies of scale sufficient to subsidise a certain percentage of "free riders", and still be the best deal going. If that's true then it will arise naturally. (In practice large insurers buy smaller ones until there are a few big ones, for this reason). The wise insured would want the large insurers to be cooperatives.

      Cooperatives of that sort always and inevietably fail spectacularly and on a grand scale because there exists no method which is practical in any larger scale then a village (where everybody knows everybody) to enforce cooperation. It takes only a number of wealthy and greedy free-loaders to ruin the whole thing. The whole idea is actually to create a fertile ground of hapless fools on on which such wanna-be warlords and princes could feed on. There is only two kinds of libertarians: the selfish, greedy, egoistical and dense as doorknob

    101. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Right, that will work wonders. Lemme see, you and 22013 families in your city pay for the police. But some, "I have better things to do with my money", 1231 or so do not. Someone is getting mugged on the street, a cop sees it and goes: "Police! The victim, please recite your Police subsciption number so that I know if I can help you!".

      Bullshit.

      1. Police organizations can delagate emergency response to one another, to whichever one is closest. 2. Emergency response can accept a small number of free riders: you settle who pays after the service is rendered, if payment can be made (this is reasonable for the same reason that it is reasonable for you to be taken to *any* hospital, if you are unconcious and need urgent care, rather than a hospital aligned with your health insurer. In short, this is an already solved problem.

      You do not like it? You can take your ass to Belize or wherever there is no taxes. No one is going to stop you.

      Well, that's what I did, isn't it? But, it is not as easy as you think to separate one's self from the claws of Canadian taxation (though it has recently gotten easier since the "test" for residency has been revealed thanks to a FOIA request). The Canadian tax code notes that tax does not apply to non-residents to the extent that the associated revenue is not from Canadian sources. However, nowhere is there a definition of non-resident -- it is left as an administrative determination to be made by the taxing body (CRA, these days, I think -- Revenue Canada when I first left). And, the means to determine this used to be kept secret. I believe it is one major "tie" or five minor ones determine residency. Major ties are supporting a family member in Canada, or owning real property available for you to live in. Minor ties are holding a Canadian passport, having a bank account, Canadian-issued credit cards, library cards, brokerage accounts, etc. For most people like me, the only ties we retain are generally a passport (Canada won't let one renounce citizenship without having other citizenship), and self-directed RRSP (which used to be very hard to trade from outside Canada).

      But, weren't you so angry in an earlier post, that I "cut and ran", as it were? Which is it?

      And, I'm curious which ass you pulled that 95% figure from, or how it was arrived at. If you ask people if they're willing to help others in times of need, I'm sure 95% would say yes. I doubt that 95% would agree that some arbitrary mob should decide how much they have to help.

      As I said, the deal is voluntary. You can leave at any time. As a matter of fact, this precisely what you did. Subsequently any whining, moaning and bitching about it being "without your consent" is just that.

      Voluntary? Hardly. Where can one go? It is only through fate, skill, and the timing of NAFTA, that I had the opportunity to leave, since I did not have sufficient funds to support a financially independent lifestyle, in, as you say, Belize. You sound like the Nazi executioner telling the Jew that he could have left Germany, while the law requires him to report to a concentration camp. Or, better yet, the redneck telling the "nigger" that he should have been born white.

      This is how it would look like in practice: a network of "communities" walled in by 20 feet tall barb-wire topped walls with guard towers, machine gun emplacements and other "security" measures, surrounded by squalid shanty-towns full of millions of impoverished people, seething with hate and resentment. All kept in check by ruthless private armies in direct employ of these "city-states". And so on. What escapes you (and no surprise there) is that this shit has already been tried on multiple occasions, with disastrous results every and each time.

      *Looks around*. Funny, I don't see barbed wire and towers here. And, the states have quite a bit of independence from the federal government (at least in theory), counties have a fair degree of independence of the state, as do cities and to

      --
      You could've hired me.
    102. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      q...uite a few immigrants, most of whom were and are liberals...

      Ah, yes, the post-1968 {Prague Spring refugees.

      We have a word for those...

      --
      You could've hired me.
    103. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      to their financial status upon entry to Canada, it is your own claim of membership in aristocracy...

      Where did I claim this? I noted that my family was, at one time, well off, but hardly aristocrats (I won't mention Castle Jiljov).

      But, suppose they were. Suppose they were plunderers, rapists, and thieves. Losing such ill-gotten booty inherited from their ancesters, to the Austro-Hungarian empire first, Nazis second, and Soviet communists second, and starting from zero would seam to be fair "punishment", No. (Don't answer that -- I know you will say "No! Make the son pay for the alleged crimes of the forefathers! Axe and pitchfork, ho!")

      It is clear that you can not conceive that someone, unfettered by the chains of oppressive taxation, relying only on their own labour, wits, and good character, could earn sufficient capital through voluntary exchange to live a life comfortable enough so that they could support their consort and projeny, and support their own retirement.

      I guess that's what they feed young minds in Canadian schools today. Mussollini was right. (Google for Mussollini and School.)

      --
      You could've hired me.
    104. Re:Income tax misnomer by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm afraid I was already persuaded before I even ran across this. Most of these Ayn Rand knockoffs seem to think that in the dog-eat-dog world they seem to want, they'll somehow end up right where their inherent superiority dictates they belong: at the top. And as long as they can believe that others bring suffering upon themselves by their inherently self-destructive attitudes, they don't have to feel sorry for anyone who doesn't thrive.

      But I think you're wrong to ascribe evil to their motives. I think in some fundamental way, they just see "fairness" in a different way than you and I do. To them, society--excluding government intervention--is inherently a fair place where hard work is rewarded, that most people earn their riches honestly and should be allowed to use them in whatever way benefits them, and anyone can make it if they're willing to put in the effort. If all these things were true, I'd probably think much the same way they do.

      I don't know how I would have handled your opponent; he seems to be an unapologetic nutjob. I can't blame you for fighting dirty, and I don't know if trying to fight clean would have persuaded anybody. But I think that half the people in this country think that everyone on the opposite end of the political spectrum is evil, and we should therefore use any means necessary to keep those people away from power. This attitude of mutual abhorrence cannot help but end badly.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    105. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      But I think you're wrong to ascribe evil to their motives. I think in some fundamental way, they just see "fairness" in a different way than you and I do. To them, society--excluding government intervention--is inherently a fair place where hard work is rewarded, that most people earn their riches honestly and should be allowed to use them in whatever way benefits them, and anyone can make it if they're willing to put in the effort. If all these things were true, I'd probably think much the same way they do.

      You might be right in many cases. I actually met people who did believe as you describe, or at least that was my sense of it. They did however discuss the issue from a completely different, labouriously impersonal angle, and tried to persuade me on the basis of things such as effort/reward mechanisms in the free-market economy from a theoretical standpoint, instead of screaming "thief" and trying to impress me with the thickness of their wallets. I do not sense anything resembling that sort of depth of phillosophical foundations of his world-view from this fellow. He instead seems to be obsessed with his (or his family's) inherent superiority, combined with an ingrained persecution complex, which again is probably generational. These two together produce a supremely warped individual which believes that he deserves a great many things from the society, much more then he in fact receives (never you mind having to face the fact that even what he gets today is an abberration of the marketplace), due to that superiority and the gigiantic impact on the world he and his parents had, and the only reason he did not attain that stratospheric level is because the nasty communist taxation, along with the oppressive communist mobs behind it, have robbed him and his parents of their rightful destiny. If he could only get rid of these "thieves", once and for all, he would have rocketed to undescribeable heights. Similarly with his parents, who instead of having to work -- while reminiscing of "old good times" while bitching continously about "thieving Canadians", would have been surrounded by many maids and butlers, as they once were. The very way he presents his arguments is strongly suggestive of these kinds of mental issues. You probably recognise this strange combination of notions of ingrained superiority, bigotry and at the same time a very deep reaching persecution complexes, as it was present quite prominently at a root of quite a few violent catastrophes in history and around the world, when it managed to infect to a sufficient degree some group or sect. It is quite fascinating actually that it can produce such far ranging sets of mindsets, both religious and secular. Ironically amongst them the very attitudes of some of the Communists from whom his family run away.

      Also I think it is a mistake to completely discount the influence of base, animalistic emotions, such as the subconscious need to hoard things and to dominate others, so strong in some people. I have read some quite persuasive arguments aimed at explaining the current recurrence of "neo conservativism", libertarianism and some similar world-views as a backlash against the rule of humanitarian ideals by those who are driven by such instincts. In short the idea is that these "phillosophies" aim at making the adherents feel that it is all right, and in fact "noble", "just" and "fair" to feel greed and to be selfish. As I said somewhere in that "discussion" upthread, it is in fact one of the oldest pursuits of mankind, to justify, in "moral" terms, ones avarice. Luckily for us all no one has yet come up with a method of doing so which is not full of gigiantic leaps of logic and outright laughable theories.

      I don't know how I would have handled your opponent; he seems to be an unapologetic nutjob. I can't blame you for fighting dirty, and I don't know if trying to fight clean would have persuaded anybody. But I think that half the people in this country think that everyone on the opposite end of the political spectrum is evil, and we shou

    106. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      1. Police organizations can delagate emergency response to one another, to whichever one is closest.

      No they don't. Even now, when police is not a for profit entity, where police departaments do not compete for "clients" between themselves, trying to take over each other's "territory", it is frequently a problem when crooks cross county, state or national borders. Furthermore, what exactly would be the "rules of engagement" for that corporate, for profit, police? What is to stop them from making their own rules as they go along, with some biggotted citizens gleefully paying for "specialty" KKK-affiliated "police" departaments. If the rich white bigots have the supreme financial power in an area, the visible minorties would have no choice but to move out of range or submit to corporate police sanctioned re-segregation, would they not? What stops the corporate police from turning into a mob protection racket, where they can shake down business owners in the area for ever increasing fees? These people, by the nature of their work, would have to be heavily armed, what is to stop rival corporate police outfits from an outright shooting war over "customers"? Etc and so on.

      Emergency response can accept a small number of free riders: you settle who pays after the service is rendered, if payment can be made (this is reasonable for the same reason that it is reasonable for you to be taken to *any* hospital, if you are unconcious and need urgent care, rather than a hospital aligned with your health insurer.

      And which today, in a much less hostile to poverty (although pretty nasty one in the US) environment, results in people refusing ambulance service because it is too expensive. Some die as a result. Make that police "service fee" high anough and you will have machine gun fire echoing across neighbourhoods as citizens take it upon themselves to dish out "justice". As a mattar of fact, in a no-government scenario, police is pretty much a non-starter as simply firing an RPG into your neighbour's house when his dog peed on your sidewalk is a far more efficient and essentially consequences-free action, as long as your stash of weapons is bigger that anyone's who would have a differing opinion. You already have the required attitude, as your musings about shooting your ideological opponents under the disguise of tresspass indicate clearly.

      In short, this is an already solved problem.

      No, turkey, none of those are "already solved problems".

      But, it is not as easy as you think to separate one's self from the claws of Canadian taxation

      Yea, yea, whine, moan, bitch, cry me a river. The Revenue Canada people failed to clairvoyantly determine, the instant you crossed the borders, if you are leaving for real or if you are just dodging taxes only to come back later. What a bunch of nasty commies! It took them a while to determine which. How dare they?!

      However, nowhere is there a definition of non-resident

      Mailing your passport back with a letter renouncing Canadian citizenship to Foreign Affairs, cc: Revenue Canada, would do the trick. Note that this still does not get you out of your past taxes, which seems to be a major part of your whining.

      And, the means to determine this used to be kept secret. I believe it is one major "tie" or five minor ones determine residency. Major ties are supporting a family member in Canada, or owning real property available for you to live in. Minor ties are holding a Canadian passport, having a bank account, Canadian-issued credit cards, library cards, brokerage accounts, etc.

      You also believe in libertarian fairies. It is curious that no one but whiny tax haters like you seem to be mired in these problems, even though a large number of Canadians cease to be residents through marriage and what not every year.

      For most people like me, the only ties we retain are generally a passport (Canada won't let one renounce citizenship without having other citiz

    107. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Ah, yes, the post-1968 {Prague Spring refugees.

      Ah yes, Chechoslovakian is now Canada's second language, why with all those millions and millions of former Prague residents around, no? What a loon.

    108. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      and starting from zero

      That is a rather questionable assertion, as I was pointing out. Aristocracy rarely escaped with "zero", or, more precisely, their view of what constitutes "zero" differs somewhat from that of an average persons' and usually includes a butler or two.

      It is clear that you can not conceive that someone, unfettered by the chains of oppressive taxation, relying only on their own labour, wits, and good character, could earn sufficient capital through voluntary exchange to live a life comfortable enough so that they could support their consort and projeny, and support their own retirement.

      Oh, sure it is possible. Just not very likely in your case, judging from the contorted stories you weave. Additionally, and this the crucial point, even if it is possible for some poeple to do so, lack of taxation, and the insitutions thus paid for, is severely destructive for the society as a whole. Exceptions society do not make. Even if a significant portion of a society could pull this off, it would still result in a disaster if the whole society was taken into account.

      Mussollini was right.

      Another one of the intellectual giants you worship?

    109. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      And he wonders why this could be a problem when taking money out ....

      I didn't say withdraw, I said trade, as in buy and sell stock. RRSPs are effectively on autopilot when one is a non-resident, though this is improving, depending on the state in which one lives (basically, one's Canadian broker has to be licensed in the relevent U.S. State). Lost $35,000 not being able to sell a stock when I wanted. (I could've returned to Canada for the day to do that, but that would, at the time, make me a retro-active tax resident, and the taxes owing would exceed the $35,000, so...)

      --
      You could've hired me.
    110. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      What stops the corporate police from turning into a mob protection racket

      Eh? What prevents them from turning into one now? The government? The largest mob of them all?

      Nothing "stops them", but then, nothing stops them now. Though the second ammendment is a rather nice deterrent, in extremis.

      A Black Panther with a shot gun is a rather convincing counterparty to a biggoted white sherrif.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    111. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Ah yes, Chechoslovakian is now Canada's second language...

      1. There is no such language. The major languages are Czech and Slovak.

      2. The reference is to those, and all other recent refugees who came as freeloaders, happily accepting welfare on the backs of those who came before them and had to struggle. Prague Springers are merely a reference to the type of immigrant.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    112. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Additionally, and this the crucial point, even if it is possible for some poeple to do so, lack of taxation, and the insitutions thus paid for, is severely destructive for the society as a whole.

      Then why do societies with less burdonsome taxation fare better in the long term than those with more burdonsome taxation in terms of stagnation of the quality of such institutions, when compared to their private counterparts?

      You dismissed an AAA repair denied my father as an "experimental" procedure. Experimental in Canada, perhaps, but not in the U.S. at the time, where the cost is a mere $12k or $20k, depending on whether one opts on the invasive or endoscopic repair.

      Today, I'm told this surger is performed in Canada, but the survival rate there is 25%, whereas it is 75% in the U.S. Why?

      If you were to argue for modest income redistribution as a practical matter, with basic health care subsidized for the poor, for example, I could accept that. (Even the U.S. has Medicare, and hospitals can not turn away people in need of urgent care for lack of funds). But, that would imply a two-tier health care system which Canada soundly rejects (and is the only nation in the world to do so). The end result is that it is a crime to spend one's own money, whatever might be left after taxes, to save one's own life!

      But, the Canadian "Social Contract" is a horrible ripoff to the married middle class wage earner supporting a family.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    113. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Eh? What prevents them from turning into one now? The government? The largest mob of them all?

      The government does indeed. As to your moaning about it being a "mob", vote some politician out and then try to vote some Cappo or his Russian mob equivalent out of his "office" and compare the results. Make sure your will is in order though before you attempt that second part.

      Nothing "stops them", but then, nothing stops them now. Though the second ammendment is a rather nice deterrent, in extremis.

      Except that vast majority of the countries on Earth do not have one and do not tolerate guns in hands of every nutcase on the street and therefore it is not any sort of deterrent now. It is not a deterrent at all in the US as an organised band of well armed individuals could successfully engage and defeat small groups of haphazardly armed citizens who are not in the business of combat for profit.

      A Black Panther with a shot gun is a rather convincing counterparty to a biggoted white sherrif.

      As I said, a complete, violent, whomever-has-the-bigger-gun anarchy. Streets running in blood until a stable equilibrum is reached of walled-in and heavily defended compounds surrounded by a sea of chaos and poverty.

    114. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      1. There is no such language. The major languages are Czech and Slovak.

      Fair enough.

      2. The reference is to those, and all other recent refugees who came as freeloaders, happily accepting welfare on the backs of those who came before them and had to struggle. Prague Springers are merely a reference to the type of immigrant.

      Even of this was true, the number of these new immigrants is insignificant, compared to the overall population of Canada. Also a vast majority of them does work and they do pay their taxes. I am not sure how a relatively small number of failed immigrants is supposed to be of some great catastrophic significance.

    115. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Then why do societies with less burdonsome taxation fare better in the long term than those with more burdonsome taxation in terms of stagnation of the quality of such institutions, when compared to their private counterparts?

      Huh?! Where!? When!? Last I heard places like the Netherlands and Sweden had the highest standards of living and were being nearly universally recognised as best places to live in. Coincidently, they do have world's highest levels of taxation. What the hell are you moaning about?

      You dismissed an AAA repair denied my father as an "experimental" procedure. Experimental in Canada, perhaps, but not in the U.S. at the time, where the cost is a mere $12k or $20k, depending on whether one opts on the invasive or endoscopic repair.

      No, I dismissed it not only because it was "experimental" here but the entire applicability of this procedure and its likely outcome is entirely of your own making. You are asking me to take your, tax hating, Medicare hating, amateur word versus that of expert doctors who had all the relevant diagnostic evidence in front of them at the time.

      Today, I'm told this surger is performed in Canada, but the survival rate there is 25%, whereas it is 75% in the U.S. Why?

      Maybe because it is performed equally on old chain-smoking railroad workers as it is on gym-going, millionaire businessmen, while it is only performed on the latter group in the US? Or more likely your number is entirely fabricated or else you would be posting a link to a study which says so.

      (Even the U.S. has Medicare, and hospitals can not turn away people in need of urgent care for lack of funds)

      Yea, it works wonders over there when people wait to the last possible moment to go to the ER when their routine illness developed into a major crisis due to lack of aid earlier or better yet, the nearest "public" ER is 200 miles away. Never you mind the abysmal level of actual services such hospitals provide and their practice of kicking out major heart surgery patients after 2 day stay to reduce costs to minimum.

      The US is probably the only one of the industrialized countries which managed to make "public service" into a four letter word. Something profoundly screwed up in their national psyche. They'd rather die horribly then share a few pennies with their fellow citizens, except when it comes to military spending and murdering people and blowing things up abroad. Then there is no shortage of cheering and expenditures.

      But, that would imply a two-tier health care system which Canada soundly rejects (and is the only nation in the world to do so).

      No it is not. Many European countries do likewise or the "private" medicine is restricted to non-essential procedures.

      But, the Canadian "Social Contract" is a horrible ripoff to the married middle class wage earner supporting a family.

      No it only appears so to you, whose idea of "fair share" is 100% for you and 0% for others.

    116. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I didn't say withdraw,

      And it never occured to you that having an active registered retirement plan in Canada would make Revenue Canada suspicious?!

    117. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Last I heard places like the Netherlands and Sweden had the highest standards of living and were being nearly universally recognised as best places to live in

      Last time I checked, those were rankings by decidely socialist organizations.

      Like Canada, they used to be good places to live, but the economic chickens have come home to roost.

      Soviet Union, Canada, Cuba, etc. -- they'll all end up in the toilet.

      (And China may oWn the U.S., what with the trade and fiscal deficits, but that's another issue.)

      --
      You could've hired me.
    118. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      treets running in blood until a stable equilibrum is reached of walled-in and heavily defended compounds surrounded by a sea of chaos and poverty.

      *Looks around*

      Hmm. No blood in the streets here, or anywhere else in the U.S. where I've lived.

      OTOH, Markham, Ontario was a pure hell for the four months I lived there, when it came to crime. Whitby was not much better. We got used to the Metro Toronto "murder of the day" being announced on the news, but certainly didn't like it.

      I remember checking violent crime stats, and learned that the rate of violent crimes against women in Canada was double that in the U.S. Of course, in Dallas, women kill their would-be rapists.

      You certainly have a sensationalist view of the U.S. Have you ever lived here for any length of time? Where? Or, do you just belive the socialist propaganda fed you?

      I used to be afraid of life in the U.S. before I moved here. I quickly learned that my fears were quite unfounded if I make an effort to work for a living and not mooch off the fat of the land.

      Indeed, I have gone through periods of unemployment, having to purchase private health insurance at rather high rates (around $800 a month). But, the savings I made while working made that livable (and was a damn good incentive to find work as soon as possible).

      In Canada, I'd be utterly at the mercy of what fraction of my taxes the government sees fit to let me have back when I'm down on my luck. I've found that people who do well, pay sh*tloads of tax, and then "fall hard" end up getting told, "You made $$$$$$ last year -- no help for you!" (Generally businessmen who's businesses failed due to competition, and who once employed dozens of people).

      Doesn't matter if one takes big risks, and creates jobs: "You were well off, so nothing for you, and how dare you fire those people when you couldn't afford to pay them!"

      Canada is a land of crooked politicials prostituting the vote of the poor to enslave the working: "Vote for me! I'll tax him more to give you a better life!"

      Not me. No more.

      And that "Notwithstanding Clause"... Geez: "These are your rights unless we say otherwise." That is just so messed up.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    119. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Last time I checked, those were rankings by decidely socialist organizations.

      That would be, according to you, everybody with the possible exception of the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation.

      Like Canada, they used to be good places to live, but the economic chickens have come home to roost.

      Say what? We have very low unemployment, booming trade, massive trade surpluses and a government with a balanced budget. The Bank Of Canada has a hard time keeping the loonie down as to maintain good export pricing for our goods because of all the foreign investment pouring into the country, as opposed to the US dollar which seems to be getting seriously wobbly. What have you been smoking again?

      Soviet Union, Canada, Cuba, etc. -- they'll all end up in the toilet.

      Is this one of those "pick the one that is not like the rest" tests?

    120. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      That would be, according to you, everybody with the possible exception of the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation.

      Well, I would't say everybody, but, in general, yes.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    121. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Hmm. No blood in the streets here, or anywhere else in the U.S. where I've lived.

      As I said, the US is nowhere near to being a libertarian country. Count your lucky stars.

      H, Markham, Ontario was a pure hell for the four months I lived there, when it came to crime. Whitby was not much better. We got used to the Metro Toronto "murder of the day" being announced on the news, but certainly didn't like it.

      You are a bald-faced liar. There were 65 murders in 2003 in the whole Greater Toronto Area, which happens to be the most populous city in the whole country. For some contrast: Dallas, Texas, your neck of the woods, happens to be ... err ... the crime capital of the US in 2003, with 244.

      Kettle, meet Pot.

      I remember checking violent crime stats, and learned that the rate of violent crimes against women in Canada was double that in the U.S. Of course, in Dallas, women kill their would-be rapists.

      Do share. In the meantime, from that article:

      Dallas is No. 2 in per capita nonviolent theft and fraud, after San Antonio. We're second for rape, after Philadelphia, with more than twice as many rapes per 100,000 people as New York City.

      Sigh, what a turkey.

      "fall hard" end up getting told, "You made $$$$$$ last year -- no help for you!" .

      I fully sympathise! How horrible it is to have to sell that $120k BMW and to re-mortage the mansion! Don't these communists have any compassion?! Don't they realise how hard it is to have to let the maid go and do your own laundry?! No help until you actually really need it!? You were not cut out for this! This is like, like, ... insulting! You are sooo better then this! Can't they tell a superior being when faced with one!? Barbarians!

      (Generally businessmen who's businesses failed due to competition, and who once employed dozens of people)

      Oh dear. Poor businessmen! Look, they only failed to compete in a marketplace, for which failure they collected a significant income while it lasted, and as a result of which there are dozens of people now out of work. And these ugly communists refuse to even pay for one butler! These wealth redistibution fiends want you to take responsibility for your own screwups and sell the yacht. Don't talk to me about these dozens of employees who now have to be helped! These peasants were the cause of it all! If they only worked harder and over the weekends as you told them! Bastards! And now the commies mock you by saying that they will give you welfare, housing aid and so on only after you are as poor as those employees of yours. The devils even dare to offer you .... job training! This is outrageous! Demeaning! What unspeakable, communist evil!

      Not me. No more.

      As I said, have fun. The one thing we can agree on is that you are happier out of here and so is the majority of Canadians for not having to put up with your childlish tantrums anymore.

      And that "Notwithstanding Clause"... Geez: "These are your rights unless we say otherwise." That is just so messed up.

      It has its uses, apparently. But the pros and cons of the Charter of Rights and the related laws are really no longer of any personal interest to you. Unlike the US politics, which, purely due to geography and the size of US population has a significant impact on Canada, the reverse is not true. Thus no problem as far as you are concerned.

    122. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Well, I would't say everybody, but, in general, yes.

      I hope you do realize how pathetically stupid that statement makes you look. Poor oppressed you. The whole world disagrees with you, but for a few like-minded nuts. The unwashed masses fail to recognize your inherent superiority and instead they mock and oppress you with all those demonic things, like taxes, traffic regulations and prohibitions against trade in human body parts. In this you have joined that another fine group of unfarily persecuted "geniuses". Perhaps you should work on joining forces.

    123. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      I hope you do realize how pathetically stupid that statement makes you look. Poor oppressed you.

      So, those who oppose the majority, particularly a large majority are stupid?

      Hmm, Jews opposing their persecution are stupid

      Nope, I don't buy that. History is full of examples of majorities, whole nations even, being dead wrong.

      Furthermore, there are quite a larger number of people who agree with me, than you might think -- you think the Cato Institute is funded by air? Fortunately, they are rather plentiful where I am.

      But, what is really telling about your character (or lack thereof), is your insistance that any wealth I might have must be "shared", yet any claim I might have had to the benefits of this "sharing" is to be denied based on a simple distrust that I might be impoverished at a particular point in time.

      I've seen this in Canada: when good times go bad, the good times are denounced (even though the requisite "sharing" was performed), and one finds the "sharing" does not include those who had previously contributed the most.

      Something fishy about that:

      "Help the poor!".

      "Mmm, O.K."

      "Damn, I'm poor now! Help me?"

      "No, don't believe you're poor".

      Clearly, the only ones who can ever derive any benefits under this system are those who were always poor. Thus, poverty, or at least relative poverty, becomes desirable and self-improvement is discouraged.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    124. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      But the pros and cons of the Charter of Rights and the related laws are really no longer of any personal interest to you.

      They are, actually: As long as communists like yourself live, they are a threat to steal what I earn. You don't get it, do you? I believe that you, and people like you, are guilty of crimes against humanity: supporting the taxation of people to the point that they no longer have the resources to purchase necessary life-saving surgery for themselves is murder. You support murder.

      You embelish prosperity to the point of believing that bankrupcy is a temporary year of negative revenue, instead of complete financial ruin: If I sold a $100,000 car to pay my employees a little bit longer, before closing my business, you would deny me what my taxes funded, because I had the $100,000 car at some point.

      I see now your problem: you envy success. You hate people who have succeeded, whether or not they currently are succesful. But, this is no surprise: it is the affliction of the socialist.

      I have friends who are millionaires as well as friends who are paupers. I consider myself in good company, on both counts. I am neither. I have enjoyed success, and I have suffered failure. You, you, would comdemn me for merely having tried.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    125. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      crimes against humanity: supporting the taxation

      Now, the truly funny part is that you probably believe this insane hyperbole as being true. Which puts you firmly in the company of the frothing lunatics on street corners, who ambush unsuspecting passer bys with stories of how "CIA has been stealing their thoughts", complete with their arms flailing wildly and spittle flying onto the hapless victims.

      The "crimes" against you ... err ... "humanity" probably started at a very young age, the first instance being when that daycare worker insisted that you share that colourful toy the daycare provided, which you hoarded desperately, with the other kids, instead of putting elbows in their ribs and trying to poke their eyes out everytime they got close. And you knew you were persecuted by the way she reacted when you let out that stream of invective you learned from your father, when he spoke of those "Revenue Canada Mass-Murderers", towards her.

      of people to the point that they no longer have the resources to purchase necessary life-saving surgery for themselves is murder. You support murder.

      Except that, as I pointed out repeatedly, that "life saving" part is all in your head. Everyone here gets full access to all reasonable life-saving procedures. That is the ones that actually have some chance of succeeding in their particular cases, to the best knowledge of many doctors, as in all serious cases doctors must consult each other and decisions are not made unilateraly. The cost of the procedures is inconsequential to these considerations. From the news alone which I can remember, off the top of my head, there is the case of a child given $17,000 a week US experimental drugs for what might be years on end, as that is the only practical way to help him. There is that Saskatchewan girl being sent to the US Mayo Clinic for a string of $6k a pop procedures. There are many such cases. In 2001 Ontario Healthecare spent $3.2 million on a rare drug Cerezyme to provide the enzyme replacement therapy to 20 (yes, twenty) Gaucher's deasease patients.

      And then there are cases of a refusal of $10 procedure to some idiot who believes that a professionally performed enema in an ER will save him from an alien abduction. Something tells me that, being as finely mentally balanced as you, he had to be dragged out by the security guards while screaming "Murderers!" (as you do) all the way to the parking lot.

      You embelish prosperity to the point of believing that bankrupcy is a temporary year of negative revenue, instead of complete financial ruin: If I sold a $100,000 car to pay my employees a little bit longer, before closing my business, you would deny me what my taxes funded, because I had the $100,000 car at some point.

      You simply are lying as usual. Not only is everyone covered by healthcare, regardless if you are bankrupt, poor or mega rich (and which is porbably the major beef with your businessmen pals, of having to mix with the proles), bankruptcy and therefore a proveable, complete loss of income does automatically qualify you for welfare and a host of other services. It does not qualify you for unemployment benefits, as you, being self-employed, never paid the unemployment insurance. Bankruptcy however does not touch your RRSP savings, which can leave you with a sizeable fortune stashed away, something that is a clear advantage to the business people, and that is not mentioning the off-shore bank accounts they are so fond of.

      see now your problem: you envy success. You hate people who have succeeded, whether or not they currently are succesful. But, this is no surprise: it is the affliction of the socialist.

      As I already pointed out, success and a pig pile of cash are not synonymous. Monetary rewards for being creative and industrous are not in any way forbidden in Canada. All that is required of those who manage to get rich is some recognition of "noblesse

    126. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      So, those who oppose the majority, particularly a large majority are stupid?

      No, only those who do so based on a lunatic, self-centered, thoroughly debunked premise. That would be you.

      Hmm, Jews opposing their persecution are stupid

      Here come the Jews again. Never you mind that they were subjected to an actual persecution, complete with one-way box car trips to the gas chambers and which make you comparing yourself to their plight a complete, cretinous, unable to grasp any sort of perspective, dickhead. That persecution complex of yours is really in control of your whole psyche. Perheaps you should use some of that $1200 a month insurance plan for a good psychotherapist. Who knows, maybe it will help.

      Furthermore, there are quite a larger number of people who agree with me, than you might think -- you think the Cato Institute is funded by air? Fortunately, they are rather plentiful where I am.

      I am looking forward to the Independent Libertarian State Of Texas any day now. Clue: you are an insignifant minority even in Texas.

      ... yet any claim I might have had to the benefits of this "sharing" is to be denied based on a simple distrust that I might be impoverished at a particular point in time.

      Again, this is a fabrication, entirely of your own making, and in a large part a result of that clinical persecution complex you are suffering from.

      "Help the poor!". "Mmm, O.K." "Damn, I'm poor now! Help me?" "No, don't believe you're poor".

      Yes, these childlish fantasies do take precedence to actual facts in your warped "worldview", no doubt as to that.

      Clearly, the only ones who can ever derive any benefits under this system are those who were always poor.

      Oh yea, they are all busy partying on their 40-footer yachts, toasting their welfare with Dom Perignon.

      Thus, poverty, or at least relative poverty, becomes desirable and self-improvement is discouraged

      Yes, that is why we have all those millionaires around here and a vibrant middle class. Last I looked, the real estate market for huge houses and luxury cars is booming (not that it is a particularly good thing from the macro-economic and environmental perspectives, but that is another discussion).

    127. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      ...which make you comparing yourself to their plight a complete...

      I made no such comparison. Are you so dense that you can't see a reducto ad absurdum disproof of your assertion that unpopularity implies stupidity? Namely, by providing an example where the popular was wrong?

      It was unpopular to oppose Nazi persecution of Jews. It was also dead right. It many be sensationalist to use such an extreme exampe, but reducto ad absurdum (dis)proofs are just that: showing that the logical consequences of the claim are absurd.

      Therefore, you can not denounce as stupid, or incorrect, a view solely on the basis of it's unpopularity.

      This is precisely the reason for the libertarian stance aginst the initiation of force: there no moral right to tax me if, left alone, I do not consume what those taxes fund. You might be popular, but you may be very wrong, and I should have the choice to participate in your scheme, or not.

      There may very well be pragmatic reasons to agree to some degree of community funding for some purpose that *looks* like a tax, and may very well be implemented as one, the telling bits being whether it is inconvenient to opt out (which generally means leaving). In fact, you could argue that a libertarian who voluntarily moves to a community with a tax structure has accepted it, though the question of whether they had any real choice in the matter comes up.

      I have no opposition to the formation of a cooperative providing health care for it's members out of all their resources. This is how mutual insurance companies work, and the idea is sound. However, I do not wish to be part of that cooperative, if it does not provide good value to me. In fact, it is possible for such cooperatives to support a small fraction of free riders and still be good value to me by virtue of economies of scale. But, this does not happen in any planned economy: mice, men and all that.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    128. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      From the news alone which I can remember, off the top of my head, there is the case of a child given $17,000 a week US experimental drugs for what might be years on end

      Must be nice to win the lottery (er, get to the top of the waiting list before dying -- what was that about 25% of cardiac patients dying before seeing a specialist?)

      Reminds me of a government lottery ad in the window of a depanneur (convenience store) in Quebec: it showed a happy face with the caption, "Moi, je gagne!" (Me, I won!).

      Well, Dad lost. Even that would be fine, except he had no choice but to gamble his health care on the state.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    129. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I made no such comparison. Are you so dense that you can't see a reducto ad absurdum disproof of your assertion that unpopularity implies stupidity? Namely, by providing an example where the popular was wrong? It was unpopular to oppose Nazi persecution of Jews. It was also dead right. It many be sensationalist to use such an extreme exampe, but reducto ad absurdum (dis)proofs are just that: showing that the logical consequences of the claim are absurd.

      Reductio ad absurdum only works, genius, when there is a way to directly and logically make a progression from a statement to such an absurd and clearly impossible position. What you have instead engaged in is a logical fallacy called the Undistributed Middle, i.e. Jews were an unjustly persecuted minority, Libertarians are a minority, therefore libertarians are unjustly persecuted.

      That is you assumed, incorrectly, that the numerical disadvantage of the proponents of your view is the criterion by which your views are recognised as illogical. In fact the reverse is true, your small numbers are the result of the illogical nature of your position. Unlike the Jews, membership in which group is based on descent and religion, and whose small numbers were dictated by a 2000+ year long sequence of historical events. There is no barrier, other then making a convincing argument, for transitioning from a position of a Socialist or a Communist to a Libertatian. On the other hand, one could completely reject the Jewish religion and still remain a Jew as far as the Nazis were concerned.

      Therefore, you can not denounce as stupid, or incorrect, a view solely on the basis of it's unpopularity.

      This is a logical fallacy called Burning a Strawman (a sub-type of the Red Herring argument). That is you are attempting to pretend that I based my argument solely on the unpopularity of your views (i.e. construct a strawman) and then you proceed to attack that false position, and to defeat it easily (i.e. burning that strawman) in order to create an illusion of an argumentative victory.

      This is precisely the reason for the libertarian stance aginst the initiation of force ...

      That stance is not only hypocritical with you (as you implied use of force on several occasions) but also illogical in the context of any proposed societal structure. It assumes that in every case there exists a non-violent method of response to any situation. Also, you quite disingenuously pretend that in a Libertarian society there is no forcible enforcement of contracts, contracts which are a critical element of that whole silly system. Do tell, how are you planning to stop thievery or even simple refusal to hold one's end of a deal followed by refusal of participation in any arbitration?

      there no moral right to tax me if, left alone, I do not consume what those taxes fund.

      Except that you always do, unless you were born to a pair of hermits in the mountains, educated by them, dressed in sheepskins and never ever had any significant contact with the rest of the society. As a matter of fact, such hermits could escape taxation completely as they could be missed by census and unless found by accident, would not register on any governmental list. But as soon as you come down from the mountain and into the village, your are immediately starting to take advantage of the communal effort, i.e. the communal facilities of a village, such as its central crossroads with the inn located conveniently therein. Move up to a small city and you got a central, paved square, some sort of street lighting and quite possibly a constable or two. And so on. At each stage of immersion in the society you are taking greater and greater advantage of its ammenities, and by doing so for a prolonged period of time and not contributing to them it is you who becomes a thief of communal resources.

      Your position is also utterly absurd from the point of view of its practicality. You assume that it is possible to pay only for th

    130. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Must be nice to win the lottery (er, get to the top of the waiting list before dying -- what was that about 25% of cardiac patients dying before seeing a specialist?)

      That "lottery" is called life, genius. Many cardiac arrest patients die because it is physically impossible to get to them within the critical first 10 minutes since the time of their heart failure. There is nothing (save telepathy+teleportation, absence of which is surely yet another insideous, devious plot of the commmie-MDs, no?) that can be done about it. Even if they do make it to the hospital, there is still a significant chance of them not being revived, no matter what procedures the doctors apply. Next thing, you are going to accuse the Universal Medicare of failing to stop aging and death in general. I can hear your whining already: "And 70% of people aged 95 do not make it to 96! Aha! What an unfair, socialist lottery!".

      If you were religious, I would suggest filing a petition to God on this subject, but as it stands I can only recommend a visit to a psychoterapist who might help you with this, another of your complexes, control freakery. And its primary cause, the anxiety you feel about life being so unpredictable.

      Well, Dad lost. Even that would be fine, except he had no choice but to gamble his health care on the state.

      No, he "lost" because nothing useful could be done for him at the time. You again keep on insisting that some hypothetical procedure, performed under hypothetical circumstances, applicability of which is entirely of your own, amateurish making, would have, with near 100% certainty saved him, never you mind the opinion of the many doctors with direct access do diagnostic data. Never you mind the fact that the cost of the procedure was not a factor. I am absolutely positive that were your father somehow sent to the US for the procedure you are so convinced of being the miraculous cure, and still have died, you would be still accusing the Medicare of being, "too slow", "failing to spend another $25134 for a more experimental procedure XYZ" or better yet "of being a band of incompetents who unecessarily sent your father to this unpredictable and experimental procedure, which must have killed him! They made him a guinea-pig! Waaaaaah!" and so on. There is simply no possible outcome which would in any way make the Universal Medicare an acceptable solution. Because this is really not about your father. He is simply an excuse you are using to masquarade your whining about the real source of your discontent: having to part with those, dearest of all things to you, coins.

    131. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      Many cardiac arrest patients die because it is physically impossible to get to them within the critical first 10 minutes since the time of their heart failure.

      25% die before a specialist sees them before diagnosis. In the U.S. a specialist can see you the day you are referred to him or her, or at most, the next day. The fraction that die between being referred to a specialist and seeing one is vanishingly small because of this because they do not wait months.

      No, he "lost" because nothing useful could be done for him at the time. You again keep on insisting that some hypothetical procedure, performed under hypothetical circumstances, applicability of which is entirely of your own, amateurish making, would have, with near 100% certainty saved him, never you mind the opinion of the many doctors with direct access do diagnostic data.

      Let's see, "You have an abdominal aortic aneurysm. It will grow until it rupture, killing you. It is almost impossible to operate in time once it ruptures. There is no procedure performed in Canada to correct this. This is a routine surgery in the U.S., costing between $12,000 to $20,000, with a five year survival rate of 75%. The risk of intervention vs. the risk of doing nothing makes it a standard practice to operate when it reaches 5 cm in size. Do you have $12,000?" [Nothing 'experimental' here].

      - Sigh - "No, I paid my taxes for health care, among other things. The rest went for food, clothing, and shelter for myself any my family, so I do not have $12,000 to spare."

      "I'm sorry, there is nothing we can do."

      Things have improved since 1999, somewhat: the surgery is now performed in Canada, but the survival rate is only 25% instead of 75%. No doubt due to the shoddy techniques: likely invasive, involving a heart-lung machine, instead of via an endoscope (where a reinforcement is introduced into the body and stitched around the aorta while the heart is beating, rather cool, actually).

      --
      You could've hired me.
    132. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      25% die before a specialist sees them before diagnosis. In the U.S. a specialist can see you the day you are referred to him or her, or at most, the next day.

      Where do you, pray tell, pull these ass-clown "statistics" from? From my personal experience, when I had a bout of a minor arythmia, I ended up in the most busy ER of the city (by accident) and was being administered stabilising drugs by a resident within 5 minutes and I was diagnosed by a specialist within 30 minutes of my arrival. What the fuck are you talking about?!

      You have an abdominal aortic aneurysm. It will grow until it rupture, killing you.

      Which we are to assume is operable in its current state, because you, the world-famous cardiology expert, is telling us on Slashdot. On the other hand there was, by your own admission, a group of actual cardiologists, who having had some experience in the matter, decided that odds were so slim as to make the whole attempt unjustified.

      There is no procedure performed in Canada to correct this. This is a routine surgery in the U.S., costing between $12,000 to $20,000, with a five year survival rate of 75%. The risk of intervention vs. the risk of doing nothing makes it a standard practice to operate when it reaches 5 cm in size. Do you have $12,000?

      And if it were truly applicable and if the odds of the success were indeed so high, the procedure would have been performed, as it is done on so many people when such procedures are unavailable in Canada. As I repeatedely demonstrated, the $12,000 was not a factor in the decision, except that you, being obsessed about money and hoarding of it, are unable to grasp that there could have been any other reasoning, like the fact that the doctors realized that in your father's case even the semi-experimental US procedure was extremely unlikely to succeed.

      - Sigh - "No, I paid my taxes for health care, among other things. The rest went for food, clothing, and shelter for myself any my family, so I do not have $12,000 to spare." "I'm sorry, there is nothing we can do."

      Such conversations simply do not occur, unless you are trying to persuade the Universal Medicare to pay for your Voodoo sessions in Africa. Cost is not a major factor in such decisions, as I already, on multiple occasions, demonstrated with many examples.

      Things have improved since 1999, somewhat: the surgery is now performed in Canada, but the survival rate is only 25% instead of 75%. No doubt due to the shoddy techniques: likely invasive, involving a heart-lung machine, instead of via an endoscope (where a reinforcement is introduced into the body and stitched around the aorta while the heart is beating, rather cool, actually).

      Again, where is the source of these "statistics" of yours?!

    133. Re:Income tax misnomer by renehollan · · Score: 1
      On the other hand there was, by your own admission, a group of actual cardiologists, who having had some experience in the matter, decided that odds were so slim as to make the whole attempt unjustified.

      Having not done anything about it, because care was denied, it eventually ruptured two years later, at which point nothing could be done. (Well the survival rates in the U.S. at that point are between 5% and 10%, but travel was quite impossible).

      What my father did not do was press for a transfer to a U.S. hospital for a repair when it would have been effective. It wasn't his style (and shouldn'tve been necessary). He trusted that if his doctors told him they could do nothing, that nothing could be done.

      I'm told that one has to be forceful in these situations, but again, that should not be required.

      --
      You could've hired me.
    134. Re:Income tax misnomer by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      What my father did not do was press for a transfer to a U.S. hospital for a repair when it would have been effective.

      You keep repeating this assertion, as if its repetition would somehow increase its validity. There is no way for you to tell, after the fact and without complete access to the knowledge and the decision making process of those doctors, what the actual prospect of the procedure's effectiveness was. There are many, many factors in any surgery and it is quite likely that the particular growth pattern of the aneurysm your father had was inoperable using that procedure, or it was extremely risky in the estimation of these doctors.

      I'm told that one has to be forceful in these situations, but again, that should not be required.

      That should not be required indeed in situations where Canadian treatment is not available but a foreign one is, it is applicable, and the prospects for success are good. But again, there is only your amateurish post-facto assertion that it was the case. As to having to be forceful sometimes when faced with asking for coverage, it only applies here in borderline cases where the professionals themselves are uncertain what to do. In that situation it is possible for a patient or his family to force their hand in some way. This type of scenarios being of course much worse with the US insurers, who are in the business of making money and thus frequently engage in acrymonious feuds with their customers and doctors over the necessity and chance of success of various procedures if their cost is high or demand exorbitant amounts of paperwork to be completed in order to obtain payment/coverage.

  52. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by ergo98 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about giving up the Socialism, eh?
    People leave Canada for a country with a better economy, and the government's solution is to spend more tax money! Brilliant move, eh?

    I presume you're talking about the US - one of the most socialist countries on the planet (or have you opted out of the endless socialist pork projects, massive socialist war machine, and corporate welfare? Is that a checkbox on your income tax return?). Of course it isn't to benefit the poor, so Americans lift their chins up and talk about their great "capitalism" versus the evil "socialism" (of the REST OF THE 1ST WORLD), strangely imagining some moral high road.

    Absolutely amazing that any American, with the enormous pork and tax-grabbing bloat of its government, can bleat the word socialist in any manner other than humor or self-deprecation.

    What's even more remarkable is the fact that the all-in tax load in the US is, in many cases, similar to or greater than a comparable person in Canada. Don't tell Americans this, though - it might upset their imaginary world.

  53. American style socialism by tv+war · · Score: 4, Interesting

    America is just as socialist as Canada or any European country.

    Only difference is that most of the American style "socialism" is more towards the military and defense sector (ie. Halliburton, Bechtel, etc ...). In Canada and most European countries, the socialism is more towards things like a health care system, welfare state, etc ...

    America has all kinds of socialistic institutions like:

    The Federal Reserve Bank,
    Fannie Mae,
    Freddie Mac,
    Social Security,
    The US Postal Service,
    Pension Benefit Guarnaty Corporation,
    Medicare,
    Medicaid,
    Amtrak,
    etc ...

    1. Re:American style socialism by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      you can add Microsoft too, (depending on which political party has the greatest control in Washington DC)

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    2. Re:American style socialism by birge · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but the difference here is that there are people (albeit not nearly enough) who are pissed as hell about all the shit you mentioned. In Canada, people would brag about it and think it a mark of their superior sophistication.

    3. Re:American style socialism by tv+war · · Score: 1

      In general, almost everybody in Canada and Europe likes to moan and bitch about the system and government. It's a very popular pastime and topic of discussion.

      Only folks who actually like the system and/or are patriotic about America, Canada, Britain, France, Spain, Italy, the German states (ie. Bavaria, Brandenburg, etc ...) generally tend to be people who are naive and haven't much, if any, extensive experiences with the government system. It seems like the system in most places tends to harden people into cynics as they get older.

      Everybody knows that the government will resort to issuing tons more federal debt and/or just plain outright printing up money to pay the bills. Nobody ever trusted the Deutsche Bundesbank, nor the more recent European Central Bank. Just have to look at the history of Bundesbank's predecessor, the notorious Reichsbank, to know why.

      Even hardcore Social Democrats (ie. moderate left-wing types) eventually figure out the system is a joke.

  54. Be aware by etzel · · Score: 1

    The shotgun in your pickup's rear window is got to go.

    --
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
    1. Re:Be aware by slightlyspacey · · Score: 1

      Depends on what province you move to ...

    2. Re:Be aware by udowish · · Score: 1

      That is absolute BS

      --
      when in doubt press enter and we'll figure it out later..
    3. Re:Be aware by slightlyspacey · · Score: 1

      Really? I take it you've never been to Prince George, BC or Alberta or Winnipeg or ...

    4. Re:Be aware by udowish · · Score: 1

      Dont get smart, I live in Alberta

      --
      when in doubt press enter and we'll figure it out later..
    5. Re:Be aware by slightlyspacey · · Score: 1

      I'll admit it ... it's been several years. Certainly before the national gun registration legislation went through. I'll leave any comments about just how effective *that* was to a future slashdot topic ....:):)

  55. Re:No philosophy degree required by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure that no one was lambasting you about not supporting Bush. Most outspoken people on the internet love to jump on the bush bashing bandwagon. Don't believe me? Enter "failure" into Google and hit I Feel Lucky. People love to hate Bush and come together in hating Bush. They get their iPods and only listen to the BBC and sit around hating Bush. Cry elsewhere.

  56. MRI waitlists are not a myth in Canada by Stone316 · · Score: 1

    Globe and Mail article on MRI's I've been trying to find statistics about MRI machines per captia without luck but on a radio show where I heard of this story, they mentioned that Japan has ~34 per million, Korea has ~7 and Canada has about 4 per million. Some 3rd world countries have more MRI machines per captia than we do.

    --
    "Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
    1. Re:MRI waitlists are not a myth in Canada by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Can you provide a link that you don't have to pay for?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:MRI waitlists are not a myth in Canada by Stone316 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I don't have one.. It appears that once their stories get so old they are pay only.

      --
      "Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
  57. Re:Waiting? Specialists? No diff even discounting by Seumas · · Score: 1

    I'm a US resident and citizen, born and bred. I had to wait 3 months for a dermatologist appointment. I had to wait 4 months for an oncologist. I had to wait 6 months for an endocrinologist. I had to wait 2 months for a dentist appointment. My serpents got same-day service for their ills - ninety year old pythons need lots of medical attention.

    Not much difference in capitalism or near-socialism as far as I can tell


    BZZT! Wrong.

    Do you know why your reptiles got instance service? Because you PAID for their service. Now, imagine how long it would take for them to have gotten attention if your pet's had to have government subsidized and controlled health care coverage from a government run animal clinic? You'd have more paper work. More delays. Less coverage. More frustration. Just like you have now with health care for humans.

  58. Re:Shaddup! Sick of the MRI story. by Chemical+Serenity · · Score: 1

    Indeed. You hear about the MRI anecdotes often in heavily taxed areas, but in other places it's a complete nonissue. My mother got an MRI within 1 week here in Halifax. My youngest son was able to get a same-day CAT scan for a relatively innocuous issue involving his sinuses.

    Therein lies the rub though, Canadian media does have myopia... they consider the big cities (particularly Toronto) as representative of all of Canada, and therefore any problem in the major urban centers is a problem everywhere. Yes, waiting lists are an issue, but not nearly as grand as some would like to make it appear in order to score political points.

    --
    "People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
  59. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

    Collateral damage who?

    Every Iraqi civilian who dies in the name of "Freedom" is just another martyr for a new society hell bent on war.

    It's all good to be guns ablazin but if you think "stopping at nothing" is the cure ... you're a fucktard. What? You think when UBL is caught that all your troubles are over? That's just the thing with abstract enemies like "terrorists". They're all around you. It'll never end.

    People like you say "it's because of the USA that Canada never gets attacked" ... oh yeah that worked so well for you on 9/11 didn't it?

    Point is you can enslave all the citizens [*] you want for your pointless wars. 20 years from now you'll still be fighting some other "enemy" and you'll never know peace.

    [*] What else do you call funding cuts for education then scholarship enlist bonuses for the military?

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  60. bipolar objectors by magarity · · Score: 1

    vowed to leave the United States in response to government policies and mainstream cultural malaise
     
    Given that the current Executive and Legislative branches at the Federal level are (nominally) conservative and mainstream cultural malaise is driven by Hollywood liberalism, who is offended by BOTH of these categories???

    1. Re:bipolar objectors by waferhead · · Score: 1

      "vowed to leave the United States in response to government policies and mainstream cultural malaise

      Given that the current Executive and Legislative branches at the Federal level are (nominally) conservative and mainstream cultural malaise is driven by Hollywood liberalism, who is offended by BOTH of these categories???"

      Given that the NeoCons in power currently are hardly "conservatives" much less "mainstream", except to those few folk confused by FOX news...: Most everyone else???

    2. Re:bipolar objectors by Nasarius · · Score: 1

      Y'know, not everyone defines "cultural malaise" as originating from "Hollywood liberalism." Personally, I think the anti-gay bigotry being written into law and serious discussion about the merits of torture are far more important than the usual cycle of sex/drugs/violence in our entertainmenet, which is nothing new (read Beowulf or Oedipus Rex). For more insight, understand what culture means.

      --
      LOAD "SIG",8,1
    3. Re:bipolar objectors by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      *SJ Zero gives waferhead a trophy.

      If more people would actually think for 30 seconds when they heard the words "Liberal" or "Conservative", we'd have a much more honest political landscape.

      --
      It's been a long time.
  61. Ya don't say! by bitspotter · · Score: 3, Insightful


    I left Arizona for Vancouver BC in Jan 2003. I've been telecommuting with the little web services outfit (still in AZ) ever since. I married a local last June, and she's sponsoring me for Perm Residency soon.

    It was a great relief. My first coherent thought after 9/11 was "This is how tyrants are made". I seem to have been right.

    I have absolutely no regrets. Answer your question?

    1. Re:Ya don't say! by petabyte · · Score: 1

      My question is does she have a sister?

    2. Re:Ya don't say! by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      So, what about a local job market? Or are you going to continue taking advantage of the US's economy while hiding in canada?

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    3. Re:Ya don't say! by bitspotter · · Score: 1

      The Canadian dollar has risen from 67 to 85 US cents in the last 3 years. I wouldn't exactly call that "taking advantage".

    4. Re:Ya don't say! by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      You're still working for an american company. If the canadian economy were so good, surely you'd have no problem finding a local job.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    5. Re:Ya don't say! by bitspotter · · Score: 1

      The job market in BC is quite good. Why do you think there are so many immigrants here in the first place?

      When I get a work Visa, I might even pick one up.

  62. Re:Where's the proof? by ergo98 · · Score: 1

    If we fall even UBL knows Canada won't lift a finger to help us

    Funny, given that Canada has been singled out by BL several times. Funny given that Canada was a critical ally in the war in Afghanistan, and that Canada's special forces eliminated much of BL's network. Funny, given that plans and threats against Canada have been found.

  63. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And your "record low level" is 6.6%. During our "recession," we hit a high of 6.3

    Only because people dropped off unemployment completely and thus disappeared from the statistics. Had we been counting actual bodies and not just checks we'd still be in the hole right now.

    --

    "Bah!" - Dogbert
  64. Re:First we take Manhattan, then we take.... Toron by ozborn · · Score: 1

    The only problem I can see being an issue is that I don't particularly
    care for hockey... Is that a deal-breaker on naturalization?

    Well that's pretty close to a deal breaker, but if you like any of curling, poutine, the Tragically Hip or beer we may be able to make an exception. :)

  65. Re: Jobs in canada vs. US by mthreat · · Score: 1

    Compare for yourself using indeed.com for Canada and the U.S..

    These numbers only reflect the number of job postings (as opposed to actual jobs), but it's one indicator.

  66. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by jcr · · Score: 1

    I presume you're talking about the US - one of the most socialist countries on the planet ...except for all of western Europe, hmm?

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  67. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  68. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by asdfghjklqwertyuiop · · Score: 1

    I.e. when Europe (note I say when, not if) falls to Islamic fundamentalism the US will be the last line.


    That's because the US is already falling to Christian fundamentalism. Not much difference.

  69. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by larry_larry · · Score: 3, Informative

    Canada is not a socialist country and it has a pretty damn good economy. Here is a graph of the Toronto Stock Exchange vs. the S&P500. By your metric, if Canada is Socialist then almost every western country other than the US must be too. Checkout The Economist's factsheet for Canada. Also, Canada has the second largest oil reserves in the world.

  70. Re:Flamebait my ass! by woolio · · Score: 1
    "Stay here and FIX this bungled mess? Listen: 12 months ago you were all lambasting me for daring to speak against His Holiness Bush's Purity, the same guy who's now in the low 30's approval-ratings-wise. The day "should we start pre-emptive wars for the hell of it? (yes/no)" and "should we drop DRM? (OK/not sure yet)" and "should we ban anybody who makes more than $100,000/year from running for political office? (Hell, yes/hell yes)" show up on the ballot is the day I know I can vote and actually AFFECT something in this highjacked country. Picking between siamese-twin shit-for-brains (Bush AND Kerry) is not a choice. Here, I'll give America one last chance: "Hey, howzabouts we tear down all the football stadiums and build libraries in their place and pay the teachers the football player's salaries so we'll have an educated generation and have an OPTION besides outsourcing all our programming to Bangladesh? Anybody with me?" Crickets: *chirp* *chirp* *chirp*"

    If you run for pres, I will vote for you and heartily encourage everyone to do the same...

    Most Slashdoters should at least like the part about keeping their jobs...
  71. Something like this IS needed by ozborn · · Score: 1

    Right now there is a 4+ year backlog on immigration - in short the system is broken and is desperately in need of funding to reduce the backlog. This affects me because I am Canadian who moved to the US in 2002 and I am married to a foreign national (Romanian).

    Canada may have a pretty good immigration system relative to other countries, that still isn't saying much. One of the reasons we moved to the US was so that my wife (who is a medical doctor) could practise medicine. Despite physician shortages the medical system in Canada is very much closed to foreign medical grads (FMGs). Highly qualfied FMGs fight for the few remaining residency positions AFTER all the Canadian MDs have had their first crack (even the guy who graduated last in his class). In the US it is much more fair to foreigners, with merit playing a bigger role.

    We have thought about moving back to Canada but the system makes it too much of a pain. For an MD it requires so many exams/money/time (although medicine is pretty much the same in English Canada and the US) that it is not worth it yet. Plus if we want to bring a mother-in-law from Romania to Canada we have to wait 4 years?! It's just stupid. BTW my wife is still not a Canadian citizen (because we are living in US) and if I were to sponsor her anyway with no assurance of success (huge amounts of paperwork and at least $1500 last I heard) she would still have to wait 18 months to get permenant residency! In short, the system really does need fixing.

    BTW having experienced both medical systems (Alberta and BC versus Kaiser in GA and BlueCross/Shield in IL) I can tell you there is no one best system for everybody. However I can say that if you do NOT have at least an upper middle class income with a good employer you are better off in Canada (BC or Alberta). We paid a big sum of money for individual coverage in GA and even after calculating in the tax difference it was better to be in Alberta (by far) and just sligtly better to be in BC. Now however we are probably slightly better off in US moneywise.

    We're still happy to move back though (for the lifestyle and cheaper high quality education) if things were made a bit easier for us.

  72. Why even bother by kahrytan · · Score: 1, Troll

    I wonder why Canada even bothers attempting to be independent.

    Why doesn't Canada just join United States? It would be most beneficial for both countries. Canadians would enjoy a large tax break while US would see twice our current landmass.

    http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/

    --
    \
    1. Re:Why even bother by bulliver · · Score: 1

      Yeah... If I wanted to be an American I would immigrate there. Dumb idea, all the states want is our natural resources, because America's own have already been raped. If something as stupid as this _ever_ happened, that is when I would move to Europe. Thanks but no thanks.

      --
      Support the mob or mysteriously disappear.
    2. Re:Why even bother by Iago515 · · Score: 1
      Sure, but there has to be some compromises:

      The US gets our vast natural resources (especially oil) and better hockey. For this the US have to give up their "Right to Bear Arms" and their guns their have and take the Canadian Medical System.

      It seems like a fair deal to me.

      --
      Take note, take note, O world,

      To be direct and honest is not safe.

    3. Re:Why even bother by kahrytan · · Score: 1

      America has plenty of resources, including oil.

      (fyi - high gas prices does not mean running out of oil)

      --
      \
    4. Re:Why even bother by kahrytan · · Score: 1

      Actually, since Canada would join US. Canada would give up their constitution for US Constitution. In layman's terms, 'Right to Bear Arms' stays.

      --
      \
    5. Re:Why even bother by udowish · · Score: 1

      WTF kind of a comment is that? Why is the US even bothering attempting to be a country? I think they should join Canada, we will even take "the freak state" Alaska and Hawaii.

      --
      when in doubt press enter and we'll figure it out later..
  73. Saskatchewan Immigration Nomination Program by saskboy · · Score: 1

    http://www.immigrationsask.gov.sk.ca/

    Sask. has been saying they want more skilled immigrants, and will sponsor skilled individuals on their federal application for immigration. With our declining population of 1 Million, we can use all the skilled immigrants we can get, as the thousands a year we do get aren't turning the tide in our population loss.

    Some industries where there is enormous potential in IT is the mining industry, including uranium mining, and the film industry is really taking off in Regina with the successes of "Corner Gas" on weekly TV and "Just Friends" in the theatres.

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
    1. Re:Saskatchewan Immigration Nomination Program by rookkey · · Score: 1

      One potential issue I see with this program is that a person participating in it would have to live in Saskatchewan .

    2. Re:Saskatchewan Immigration Nomination Program by baaaan · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with living in Saskatchewan that couldn't be alleviated with a change in the government? I like living here, and will continue to live here unless the government isn't swapped out during the next provincial election.

    3. Re:Saskatchewan Immigration Nomination Program by rookkey · · Score: 1

      Well, you know your province may be considered undesirable by some when you consider that the motto of Manitoba is, "Hey, at least we're not Saskatchewan!"

    4. Re:Saskatchewan Immigration Nomination Program by baaaan · · Score: 1

      A fairly rudimentary Google Search yields zero results for a search on "Hey, at least we're not Saskatchewan!" -- so I really question how widespread it really is. On that note - I'm not sure why Manitoba has started up with the jokes. I can't really see anything that would be having me set foot in Winnipeg (or is it Winterpeg?) anytime soon. Furthermore, I've never really cared whether or not Saskatchewan is desireable to cronies who live in Alberta or Manitoba. I've had many discussions on the psychology between the rabid Saskatchewan bashing that goes on (particularly in Alberta), as it's quite odd. If you're in Alberta, why do you care so much about Saskatchewan? There are a lot of places I wouldn't like to live for a whole variety of reasons. That doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with them. I'm sure there are many places a lot "worse" than Saskatchewan, yet I'm not sure I would ever bring myself to bash them -- especially a fellow Canadian province. Talk about poor taste. I'm still waiting for an intelligent, non-facetious answer to my question on what's so bad about Saskatchewan that couldn't be fixed with a government changeup. Really.

  74. Re:Lengths? What Lengths? by jZnat · · Score: 1

    Dude, this is Slashdot; not being PC will get you modded +5 funny. And so will the post pointing that out...

    --
    'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
  75. The wait vs. the cost by jd · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It is true that nationalized healthcare systems, such as the NHS of Britain, and the Canadian system, are slow. That could be fixed by adding more doctors. It's a solvable problem. In the US, insurance costs are through the roof (you could probably rival Bill Gates on wealth just by not getting sick), medicare is rife with fraud by hospitals and not all insurance is even accepted at all hospitals, so you can get turfed out even in life-or-death situations.


    (Actually, in America, you might get turfed out in critical situations anyway. Many hospitals don't have an emergency room, as they cost more than they make and US hospitals are there for profit not care. Those ER rooms that do exist are hopelessly overcrowded, overworked and are considered by the CDC to be extremely high risk areas in the event of an outbreak of a contageous disease. If bird flu ever goes critical, it will likely do so in a US emergency room.)


    The American situation, unlike the British and Canadian counterparts, is not fixable. Because hospitals in the US are profit ventures, not health-care centers, they have no interest in doing anything that will cost more than it will earn. Proper emergency care is expensive and earns little, as most accident and crime victims are uninsured and/or flat broke. They have no interest in lowering prices, because the bulk of "paying" customers have health insurance and so never see the real price tag and therefore have no reason to care what it is.


    Insurance companies in the US are also money-grubbers and they know how to rake the money in. By charging the companies a "reduced rate" for bulk purchases, they can absolutely guarantee that customers never see the real cost to their paychecks. The victim - errr, employee - only sees a given deduction for their deduction. What they don't see is what the company is really paying and therefore what the company is really calculating payscales on. In the end, you pay the full cost but you only see a fraction of it on the pay stub.


    By these accounting tricks and other fraud, the US employees are bilked billions of dollars and somehow consider themselves better off because they don't have the wait. Trust me, if you threw billions of dollars out the window in England, you'd get prompt healthcare too. Well, just as soon as anyone realized that was real money and not something from a Monopoly game.


    (For that matter, there's always BUPA, if you insist on the insurance thing in more civilized lands.)

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:The wait vs. the cost by PPGMD · · Score: 2, Insightful
      With exceptions of specialist hospitals, such as ones that only treat children, any hospital worth it's salt has an ER, at least in this state. If Canada or the UK threw the amount of money needed to take the wait times down to reasonable levels (no person should have to deal with the pain for more then a week), they would see such a sharp incline in spending that it would make the government accounts choke.

      Medicare fraud sucks, but it's something to deal with, but it's there for those that need the care, whether old, or simply those that can't pay. Also most states have health plans for the low income, in particular children.

      Would I rather be in a system where fraud can happen, but is punished when found, or be on my couch, in pain waiting for a doctor? Personally when you are in pain, the only thing that matters is removing it. Something is wrong when your citizens have to fly to other countries to get needed surgeries.

    2. Re:The wait vs. the cost by Slashdoc+Beta · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I see anything wrong with the fact that my company is paying 90% of my health insurance costs.

    3. Re:The wait vs. the cost by awol · · Score: 1

      How about some facts for that argument on the efficacy of nationalised health care. The numbers are kinda scary.

      (disclaimer I'm an Austrlian living in the UK) Here's the thing, Health care is pretty much an actuarial issue with a strong public policy rider. You can work out how much healthcare your society needs as a function of age, nutrition, diet, lifestyle etc of the population, the specific individuals that require that service fall into two clases, those that, by the very nature of their lot in life need more care (the poor probably require more interaction with the service for a wide variety of reasons from nutrition, nature of work, "lifestyle choices") and those who happen to be unlucky enough to need the service, hit by a car, cancer, nasty staf. infection, both present justifcation for why the service is a public good, they did not choose to be where they are and the unsubsidised payment for the service would be unfair when the price had to be borne by the society as a whole anyway, why not let society as a whole pay for it.

      The arguments about efficiency are there to be made (and disagreed with) but in my view it is only a technical failing that stops a nationalised health care system from being more efficient than a series of private institutions that must replicate a wide variety of the same services. This is different from other industries because of the nature of healthcare and the "base level" or "capacity" issue highlighted above.

      --
      "The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging."
    4. Re:The wait vs. the cost by jd · · Score: 1
      Assuming that's not satire, the answer is that you actually pay 100% of the cost - your wages are simply reduced by the amount that the company has to fork over for the remainder. Where else did you think the money came from? Generous shareholders?


      But the money still has to be earned, which means you pay for everyone else's health care expenses in higher-priced goods. So, in essence, the US has nationalized health care anyway - you're just being taxed by the corporations and not the Government. Well, perhaps. Tax write-offs also have to be financed by someone, which means some of your income tax is actually going to pay your corporation for their contribution for your benefits.


      Inflated prices, inflated taxes and reduced wages - all so that you can claim the company is paying the lion's share of the insurance. Someone's getting ripped off, royally.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    5. Re:The wait vs. the cost by PPGMD · · Score: 1
      And with NHS you are still paying for 100% of your healthcare cost, or at least what the government deems to be your portion via taxes.

      The thing that people forget, is that government programs may seem free because you don't directly get the bill, but in the end they still cost you money because you are paying for it with your taxes.

      I would rather have a choice via insurance, then to have to deal with the government. Anything that the government gets itself invovled it, it generally mucks it up.

    6. Re:The wait vs. the cost by Aeron65432 · · Score: 1
      I know I've already committed karma suicide by taking an unpopular stance several times in this article, but I'm going to do it again by strongly disagreeing with a 4digit UID.

      Anyways, the insurance costs are really not bad. One thing that people don't often realize (from foreign countries) is that we rarely pay the upfront cost. The vast majorities of American workers have some sort of payment or coverage help from their businesses. I know most other countries don't have this.
      The comment about getting turfed out in life or death is completely false. There are very few hospitals that will reject insurance if it is a legitimate corporation. That, and hospitals in America will do anything in their power to save your life first, and worry about costs later. Most hospitals do have ERs, few don't. Only the local community hospitals don't, any significant city will certainly have at least one. Case in point: I live in a city of 200,000 people, and there are two major hospitals both with ER's.
      I see no inherent problem in hospitals being for-profit, although it is untrue that all are. There are significant amounts of university-run hospitals. I use my hometown as a case example here again, the University of Rochester runs Strong Memorial Hospital which is a nationally recognized hospital for its outstanding care and services. I do not think that the American system is either broke, (certainly it has flaws), or un-fixable. The flaws we have certainly can be fixed.
      I prefer the system we have in the States. For-profit doesn't always work out the best, but it does vastly increase efficiency. Hospitals in the States have more specialists, faster times, and IMHO, better care overall. Does it cost us money? Sure, deductibles from our paycheck, or co-pays. But you pay for that in higher taxes up North.
      I have a lot of respect for Canadians, and I think it's a very interesting venture to try to give free-health care. But I think oftentimes it creates more problems than it solves. If your system satisfies you, beautiful. But I'll keep ours.

    7. Re:The wait vs. the cost by PixelScuba · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you also speak for the ~46 million of us that can't afford Health Insurance here in the States? We're not lazy, we work very hard, but Health Insurance here is TOO costly to afford. I can't count the number of times I've suffered with an illness or injury simply because I can't afford to go to the hospital... and I KNOW I'm not alone.

    8. Re:The wait vs. the cost by birge · · Score: 1
      they have no interest in doing anything that will cost more than it will earn

      This is called reality, sport. Even a socialist healthcare system has to take in at least as much as it spends.

    9. Re:The wait vs. the cost by pavera · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't know how many hospitals you've been to in the US, but I've never been to one that actually called itself a "Hospital" that didn't have an ER (I've lived in 5 cities in 4 states...)... Now sometimes you'll see a "medical center" that doesn't have an er.. but anyway...

      The US is fixing the "No one sees the price tag" problem, its called HSA's. Hundreds of companies are moving to them, I own a small business its how my employees get coverage, we save tons of money on premiums, and we save tons of money on care because we all see the full price of everything, and we can shop around. HSA's are introducing value shopping to the health care market (by value I mean cost+quality=value not just cost) So if you find 2 doctors, one who will do procedure x for 300, and he's rated a B, and another doctor who charges $5000 for the same procedure, but he's rated slightly higher (maybe B+) you go for the $300 doctor...

      Anyway, this is something I've learned in the last year using an HSA, doctors in the US really do overcharge (but some don't), and the reason they do is because the insurance is picking up the tab. For just a regular checkup type visit (30 minutes in the chair, vitals, weight, eyes, ears, mouth, basic physical type stuff) I was quoted earlier this year anywhere from $1000 to $45. I ended up paying $85, the doctor was professional, and good, I didn't have to wait, and I saved $450 from what our old family doctor was charging (to our previous insurance, so we never knew how much he charged).

      Anyway, the "hidden charge" problem can be fixed and is being fixed, and guess what its being fixed by creating an OPEN MARKET! I know you lefties will hate that. The Health care market is not an open market right now, its run by basically an oligopoly (the doctors) and a gov't sanctioned monopoly (insurance cos) The insurance cos are in effect a monopoly because they have an OK from congress to share information, and colude on prices. Ever wonder why there aren't any "budget" health insurance companies? It's because the Insurance industry has pushed through enough laws to make it illegal to be a health insurance provider unless you play their game and set prices where they already are.

      The US system can be fixed and much more readily and cheaply than the UK, or Canadian problems. IE if everyone in the US moved to HSA's there would be an immediate drop in prices across the industry everyone would save money. In national health care systems the only solution available is to spend more money on extra doctor's specialists, equipment, etc. Previously in this post it mentioned that Canadians pay $60/mo for their "free" health care... Well if they got the level of service that is available in the US, I bet it would cost closer to $300/mo... oh wait... that looks alot like the $250/mo I used to pay (regular insurance I had before HMO, I own the business, I know all the costs). If people are waiting 3+ months for a specialist that I can make an appointment to see next week, well.. that is 12 times more capacity (1 week vs 12) so I'm probably being generous with only making the cost 5 times more (60 * 5 = 300).

      My point is I think you're wrong, the health care situation in the US can be fixed, and the way to fix it is to open the market, not socialize it. National health care leads to lower levels of service, or to provide the same level of service, you have to spend just as much as people are in the US.

    10. Re:The wait vs. the cost by infinite9 · · Score: 1

      That could be fixed by adding more doctors. It's a solvable problem.

      Yeah, pay them more and more people will become doctors. I was shocked to hear what a doctor in the UK makes.

      In the US, insurance costs are through the roof (you could probably rival Bill Gates on wealth just by not getting sick), medicare is rife with fraud by hospitals and not all insurance is even accepted at all hospitals, so you can get turfed out even in life-or-death situations.

      I have eight kids (not a typo). I'm an independant contractor. I do this little dance where I take a real job, either salaried or w2 just to get health insurance for a few months, then I switch back to independant and continue on cobra for 18 months. (for the non-americans, the federal government requires that employers offer the same insurance to former employees for 18 months after they leave.) For this, I'm currently paying $1200 a month. Believe it or not, it's sort of a good deal because we go to the doctor often. I'm also taking a new autoimmune drug called enbrel that costs about $2400 a month. :-) So I'm coming out way ahead.

      so you can get turfed out even in life-or-death situations

      Hostpitals are required by law to "stabilize" you if you show up, regardless of whether or not you can pay. That said, I've heard horror stories about hospitals placing workers outside the emergency room doors to interrogate people about their health insurance before allowing them in, even if they're bleeding to death.

      Another issue is that hostpitals charge very different amounts based on your insurance situation. Insurance companies negotiate special rates with hospitals and doctors which is why your insurance may not work at some hospitals. An MRI may cost $500 if billed to an insurance company. But if you're self-pay, then they'll charge you $1000 or more for the same MRI.

      Years ago, I passed out in the shower and hit my head. My wife thought I was having a siezure so she called 911. The ambulance showed up, but I came to before they loaded me up, and she drove me over to the hospital. It was 1 week before our insurance was supposed to start so we didn't want the expense of the ambulance ride. When we walked in, we said the S-word (siezure). That made them classify me as a "level 4 trauma victim" which required a special level of observation by the emergency room staff. Literally every resident doctor in the hospital stopped by to get their fee. I was fine, but stuck there for over eight hours. I had an MRI just to be sure, it came back fine. The bill was $3500, and that was without being admitted to the hospital. This was about 10 years ago, I'm sure it would be closer to $6000 now. It nearly sunk us.

      The insurance companies make money because they negotiate special rates from the health care providers while charging you and your employer an arm and a leg. They also look for every little technicality possible to not cover a claim. I've heard many stories about people who've had to sue insurance companies to get them to cover transplants or cancer care for example after their denied coverage, and this is when it was obvious that it should be covered. Another thing people often overlook is that most health insurance here has a maximum lifetime benefit amount that's usually around $1,000,000 or $2,000,000. All you have to do to hit that is have kidney failure, cancer, or get aids.

      --
      Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
    11. Re:The wait vs. the cost by jd · · Score: 1
      That is perfectly true. The cost always comes from somewhere. I'm nopt seeing this "choice" thing you speak of, though - most companies offer only one health insurance company and usually only one plan from it. If you go elsewhere (this "choice", I guess), you are still going to be paying 90% of the costs of the plan you didn't select, because that's all done within the company.


      In the end, you have no more (or less) choice than you would have in a system where there was national health coverage, PLUS private insurance you could buy on top of that. It works out to about the same, money-wise. The difference is that you lose scale efficiency, as you've a large number of organizations squeezing profits out of the money flow.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    12. Re:The wait vs. the cost by Slashdoc+Beta · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I understand you point. If I were to decline my insurance coverage, the company would not give me a $10,000 raise. In fact I would get something on the order of an extra $40 a month. Due to volume discounts and tax deductions, the companies are ending up paying less than employees would if they were to buy insurance on their own. Therefore, it's a win-win situation for everyone. I suppose that's why we call health insurance a "benefit". I have traveled to Canada several times and I would say the prices are about the same and from what I heard so are the wages (or perhaps even less than in US). The taxes, on the other hand, are greater in Canada.

    13. Re:The wait vs. the cost by PPGMD · · Score: 1

      Generally you get to see your benefit package before you begin working for the company. You can also work out different benefits packages once you get above entry level, though a company healthplan is generally cheaper because you can get it deducted before taxes, so there is less taxable income, thus less taxes.

    14. Re:The wait vs. the cost by winwar · · Score: 1

      "The US is fixing the "No one sees the price tag" problem, its called HSA's. Hundreds of companies are moving to them, I own a small business its how my employees get coverage, we save tons of money on premiums, and we save tons of money on care because we all see the full price of everything, and we can shop around."

      Companies are moving to them because they save money. More correctly, they shift costs from the company to the employee. Not wrong of course but they aren't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts....

      How about the people who can't get/afford insurance? They do exist. HSA's aren't very useful for them.

      Shopping around is a bit of a joke. That's great if you have a lot of time and don't want to stay with a particular doctor or don't have specialized problems. For many people it doesn't work. Hell, ever tried to pay CASH to a doctor when you didn't have health insurance? Not only do you confuse the hell out of the staff, but you get to pay "rack" rates (no negotiation) and pay it NOW. So much for a discount for saving them the trouble of getting their money sooner and with less hassle... In short, the uninsured subsidize the insured in this country. Same with prescriptions.

      Lots of people rant at nationalized health care. But it is the best solution. It removes the profit motive. It removes inefficiency. It increases the number of people in the risk pool. Granted, it does suck for people who never get ill/sick/hurt. But any insurance does.

      As for the lower levels of service, I don't see it. Service sucks for 40 million plus in this country now. I don't have a problem waiting for care-hell when I had good insurance I often had to wait months for needed care. Specialized scans (as are often brought up) are overused. MRIs are used in this country because they are readily available not because they are needed in many cases. They are often the refuge of crappy doctors.

      Your solution is unworkable. You cannot make the health care system into a free market. Possibly a lot freer, but not totally.

    15. Re:The wait vs. the cost by winwar · · Score: 1

      "That, and hospitals in America will do anything in their power to save your life first, and worry about costs later."

      Big fucking deal. Sure, that's great. But remember they don't have a choice in that matter. If you are bleeding to death, they'll stop the bleeding. If you have a heart attack, they will treat you. But if you need a transplant, well, you will probably be out of luck. Long term treatment, sorry. Oh, treatment so you can be a productive member of society, that will be $$$.

      The later costs will probably bankrupt you.

      I believe that in every basic measure, Canada has better care. We can, of course, debate those measures. It should be noted that I do not consider speed and number of specialist as better care. The US system works fine for those with good jobs or who can afford good insurance. It is broken for those without.

      I think it comes down to this: Does everyone have a right to affordable basic health care? If you answer no, then the US system is great. If you answer yes, then a nationalized system is currently the best way to go.

  76. Re:Flamebait my ass! by emagery · · Score: 1

    Its a tough thing; I can find something to agree with on both sides of the table.

    America has absolutely fabulous potential... and used to live up to it... hell, back in the 50s, a high school JANITOR could pull in a decent enough living for his whole family... now both parents would have to double shift just to make due.

    Everything feels so deliberate now... how can so many bad choices be bad so consistantly and so frequently? Hewlett Packard fires thousands of americans, hires thousands of indians (not that indians don't deserve jobs too, but...) and buys several 30 million dollar private jets... then puts them under a small corp to hide the fact when the press gets wind. Microsoft backs bill after bill to increase cheap foreign IT and technical labor importation TO the U.S. (H-1B madness).

    Money has become the primary determing factor in elections. One of the SEVERAL national debt cap increases bush got just his first term was for more than the entire depth of debt we had under Reagan, and we/he burned through it in 18 months, asking for (and getting) more, of course. We don't know what they're lying to us about and what they aren't (if anything anymore).

    Partisan propoganda has gone macarthyist (spelling?), and a recent poll on MSNBC had a majority of the polled suggesting it was time for a THIRD party. I don't think these people even remember who they work for anymore. The president, congress, judges, police, etc... they're not the boss. They must make hard choices in order to balance the wants and needs of one of the single most varied culture on the face of the planet, and you can never please everyone... but at the same time, its nearly dynastic now... if you are in a certain family, or just plain have enough money, you're in. Ultimately, we're the collective head honcho... and they serve us! But, really... how many of you here (americans that is) really feel like you have any power at all anymore?

    Education is declining sharply (india and china are absolutely humiliating us in tech/engineering graduates, and even europe has reversed its own educational decline). It's also rediculously expensive. And from first hand experience, I can tell you how horribly you are treated (fiscally) at the college level if you aren't from a well-to-do family (that's a windbag story in itself). And no sooner do you have that quarter-million-dollar peice of paper, you find your jobs are being given to VISA workers from indonesia or going overseas altogether... because the bills you gotta pay in order to make up for the abuse you called an education make your cost of living too high and your rate of pay unattractive to those who can just lobby congress to get more H-1B foreign labor or tax breaks for hiring child labor in china for a pittance. Blah blah blah...

    I guess the question is... how long do you stick with it... and when do you divorce? I really don't know.

  77. Economic and Currency considerations by argoff · · Score: 1

    In all fairness, Canada has a more stable currency than the dollar, and unlike the US it has not scheduled itself an appointment to fall off a hyperinflationary debt cliff. The US has way to much debt, and way too much loose money. Canada can back up their currency with its vast natural resources, the US only has "the good faith of the federal government" - God help the USA.

    Unfortnuately, Canada has it's own set of problems. First off, it's sales taxes reak economic havoc, and it's wildly popularized social programs don't work well. Large numbers of Canadian businessmen do business in the US and not in Canada - and they do it for a reason. There are massive and large numbers of Canadians that buy in the US and use the US health care system - and they do that for a reason too.

    Also, the HUGE problem .... the US economy getting ready to fall off a hyperinflationary debt cliff. I'm seriouus, really, it's true - look at all the debt, look at what the gov't has done to the money supply. They say the US economy is more efficient now, but really a more efficient economy has more extreme reactions to bad monitary policy, not less extreme ones.

    Anyhow, my point is that for better or worse Canada's economy is linked to the US economy so when things go to hell here, they will almost certainly go to hell there too - even if Canada has less debt and more resources to back up it's currency, it's won't matter much when 85% of it's commerce self implodes.

  78. financial rape by jbellis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    wait, you recognise the problem, but you still want to move to "almost as socialist as europe" Canada?

  79. Re:First we take Manhattan, then we take.... Toron by Tamerlan · · Score: 1

    Tim Hortons, skating, or Alexander Keith's will do too.

  80. I agree on every point you've made by jd · · Score: 1
    I would want to inject just one sour note, though. First, way too much clear-cut. It damages the soil and the rivers, reduces the environment for the wildlife, and looks positively horrible from the air.


    I'd also caution against pride - Denmark has won the "best place to live" award from the UN for the past five or six years.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  81. You bigot by DavidinAla · · Score: 1

    It's the elitists like you who are always telling others how prejudiced they are, but you sound far more bigoted than the typical racists (white or black) that I've dealt with anywhere. There are good people everywhere and morons everywhere. You're clearly among the latter group -- no matter where you might live.

  82. Re:Flamebait my ass! by emagery · · Score: 1

    Hee... I'm elligible to run for pres in 2012... Since I'm not uber rich, I wouldn't have any dream of winning, but I WOULD like to make it to a couple televised debates. Why? Well, to answer the questions with actual answers... and see how badly that messes up the likely candidates. Seriously...

    My only concern with running is... well, the Mayan calander ends in 2012, doesn't it? No doubt, my running would cause the end of the world!

  83. Wow, Is this the same Canada I live in? by freezin+fat+guy · · Score: 1

    Man, what is this utopia you speak of? :)

    Seriously, I love Canada with all my heart but it sickens me that we've started feeling the need to flaunt. Canada and America deserve to be neighbours; we're both self-righteous. If we don't watch it we'll start losing friends too.

    I live in Manitoba because I like fresh air and snow but it's certainly not for everyone. I'm not about to hold a gun to anyone's head and tell them they can't leave.

    On topic, it's a good idea to hang on to some talent. High time for smaller countries to believe in themselves and become a little more self-reliant.

  84. Apart from Australia, of course by wrmrxxx · · Score: 1

    Australia seems to move around OK - http://www.satirewire.com/news/jan02/australia.sht ml

  85. Canada isn't all that it's cracked up to be by StandardCell · · Score: 4, Informative

    As a Canadian who has worked for years both in Canada and the United States, and having taken the plunge 18 months ago to come back to Canada to work, I can say that it has been an unpleasant experience.

    Healthcare up here is abysmal. Trying to find a family doctor is nearly impossible, and there are long wait times for elective procedures and medical imaging. One of our family friends died of a heart attack after waiting nearly a year for bypass surgery. I'm paying more for health care up here than I ever did in the US due to my premiums.

    Education is a joke up here too. Ontario, for example, passes ALL children unless they basically hand in nothing or choose to do nothing throughout the year. My neighbor's son got straight "R" grades ("F" is no longer politically correct), yet somehow passed to Grade 5 last year. That'll keep happening until he graduates high school, even though this kid still can't read a basic "See Jane Run" type book.

    Daily life is ok, but there are some things you have to be aware of. Although the overall murder rate is lower in Canada, per-capita rates of rape and property crime are all higher than in the United States. I feel less safe here than I did in the San Francisco Bay area and much less safe than in the Lehigh Valley of Pennsylvania. Try rolling through Toronto and see what it's like these days. Forget about the unbelievably bitter cold, excessive snow if you live in Eastern Canada, and generally longer winters. Weather counts for a lot.

    Then there's the financial aspect of it. Sure, people don't get bankrupted here, but if you're not chronically or seriously ill you are better off in the US. I've paid more for health care here since my employer doesn't cover my premiums (yes, we pay premiums, $60/month/person). Auto insurance is 50% more expensive than what I paid for in California, plus I can't remove tickets from my record with traffic school. House prices are insane; I can't buy a fully-detached house with two car garage for under $400k, and I can't deduct my mortgage interest or property taxes from my federal taxes. I get paid less in equivalent dollars than any job in the US, and all of my Canadian friends who have worked both places want to go back south unless they have significant family obligations north of the 49th. I pay more in taxes, especially at the till (15% sales tax on a car is insane!). The government's overly-liberal immigration policies make unemployment consistently 2% higher at a minimum than in the United States so I'm always looking over my shoulder thinking when my time might be next.

    Finally, there's the government. Lots of /.ers think that Canada is some magical place of freedom. It's not. Freedom of speech is curtailed as we have laws against "hate speech" that the US would consider violations of the First Amendment. Freedom of the press is a joke, since several times reporters were spied on, wiretapped or just simply had their personal files confiscated without a warrant by corrupt police who feel that due process is an inconvenience. Our Senate isn't elected nor provides regional representation, but is an expensive rubber stamp with no real power. Heck, we didn't even have our full independence from the United Kingdom until April 19, 1982! We have sexist and racist government departments that purposely exclude white males from positions supposedly in the name of diversity. There are 36,000 deportation orders on illegal immigrants that can't be executed because the government doesn't know where they are. They let the families of Somali warlords and Sikh terrorists stay in this country. And, in general, the majority of people here have been lulled into utter stupidity by the clever social engineering of Pierre Trudeau's liberal party over the last 35 years that has their party about to be voted back into power that has stolen billions of dollars from taxpayers (Adscam, HRDC et al). Not to mention that Canada is the only major industrialized nation in the world to

    1. Re:Canada isn't all that it's cracked up to be by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      The big thing in Ontario is the fact that they've raised the bar with regards to education.

      If you want a raised bar, do something about it. Get the word out there that there are people who dislike the new, more difficult high school curriculum and mandatory literacy testing in Grade 10. Maybe, with enough sane people, we can get higher standards in elementary schools as well. Frankly, I'm rather upset that elementary calculus isn't taught by the end of Grade 12.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    2. Re:Canada isn't all that it's cracked up to be by smchris · · Score: 1

      You sound like my sort of pessimist :)

      Living not far from the border, I've gotten across much less than I would have liked and Canada has a fascination for me but your list has the ring of truth. I've suspected that the wages/(prices+taxes) ratio, in particular, would entail an economic hit in Canada. At least before a person gets a chronic disease.

      One thing I found interesting was looking at the provinces' web sites for economic information -- in particular the income distribution by quartiles. British Columbia looks like an inverse normal curve. Half the people are dining high and the other half are serving them. Some socialist paradise. If a person wants an egalitarian province with a strong middle class, it looks like French would come in handy from what I can see.

    3. Re:Canada isn't all that it's cracked up to be by pavera · · Score: 1

      Are you serious? No calculus at all in high school in canada? I was introduced to calculus in grade 9, and had full blown calc in grade 11. And that's in a US public school...

    4. Re:Canada isn't all that it's cracked up to be by mevets · · Score: 1

      yes, please don't come here. It's cold and smells bad too.

    5. Re:Canada isn't all that it's cracked up to be by ShieldWolf · · Score: 1

      As a Canadian currently living in Texas I have to ask this:

      If this is how you feel, WHY THE F*CK did you move back?!?!

      --
      just = (My)Opinion.toCents();
  86. Re:Don't forget the important part! by Ando[evilmedic] · · Score: 1

    Sorry, exactly whom do you speak for? Are you sure?

  87. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by Hiro+Antagonist · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Despite your low slashdot ID, you're an idiot.

    First off, if I had to choose between the Christian Fundamentalists, or the Islamic Fundamentalists, I'd rather go with the latter. They have less history of violent persecution of non-believers, and before you bring terrorists into the equation, remember that Jerry Falwell would be the same as Osama Bin Laden if he didn't have so much bloody power over here in the 'States.

    Second, I see the overall worldwide belief in religion in general declining. All the Japanese and Chinese I know are atheists or agnostics, as are most of the Europeans and Canadians, and a good number of my fellow college students. Christianity just doesn't matter that much anymore outside of the U.S., and Islam doesn't matter that much outside the middle east.

    --

    --
    I Hit the Karma Cap, and All I Got Was This Lousy .sig.
  88. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by Rayonic · · Score: 1
    Only because people dropped off unemployment completely and thus disappeared from the statistics. Had we been counting actual bodies and not just checks we'd still be in the hole right now.
    That's an urban legend. Unemployment level is determined by survey.

    Read for yourself: http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/unemploy.htm
  89. Slightly Off Topic: Copyright Reform in Canada by xtal · · Score: 1

    Remember, Canadian slashdotters; when they come knocking, make sure to give them an EARFUL about how we don't want federal jail time for copying songs. Or *IAA gestapos getting private information without warrant or cause. This is one of the few times of year where they might actually listen to you.

    --
    ..don't panic
  90. Re:Canada's Vitamin Policies by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    I hate to break the news to you, but have you seen the budget of your country lately?

    It doesn't matter which one it is. Canada is the ONLY country in the Group of Seven nations to have a balanced budget for seven consecutive years.

    In your country, you wouldn't be paying for it. Your kids would. Maybe.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  91. Canada v. US = Generals v. Globetrotters by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    Your claims are impossible to back up, and you sound like a travel brochure...a desperate travel brocure

    The fact is, Canadians that I've known bitch more about their government (with good reason, they vote for parties, not candidates in the national election) than Americans, and that is saying alot.

    BC bud is the best???  yeah b/c the Candian government grows it and sells it illegally...what if the US government did that?  yeah we'd have the best bud...besides we can get anything here that you have...most of it goes here anyway

    Health care, blah blah...it's not like your system is perfect.  Besides, Americans are too smart for free health care, we'd learn how to work the system.  That's the thing...Americans are too smart to let some bastard in an office in some far away city to make their decisions for them.

    As for your fascist point...you're wrong.  Fundamentalist Mormons that are driven out of local communities in America for practicing poligamy move to where???  Canada...because it is tolerant of bigamy and child slavery i guess...where's your liberal high horse now???

    >"However the money collected in taxes mostly gets back to the Canadian people in some form, whereas in the US taxes paid go mostly to giant corporations with fat government contracts"<

    Sorry to burst your bubble, but Canada is the modern nation it is today because of America.  Yes our corporate structure is faulty, I hate it too, but you can't make valid points about it because your country would be trapping furs if it wasn't for American corporations.  If they're so evil, why doesn't the soooo democratic and enlightend Canadian government pass laws that are strictly anti-corporate (ALL corporations, not just the ones from the U.S.)...another thing, most of the really 'evil' corporations are globally owned and operated, so it's not just the U.S...it's rich people in every country

    Yeah, Canada...why try to be something that you're not???  just take the U.S. dollar and you can apply for statehood...we'll even let quebec speak french...

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:Canada v. US = Generals v. Globetrotters by abigor · · Score: 1

      1. Why are you type in a monospace font? Which leads me to point 2:

      2. You're a retard.

    2. Re:Canada v. US = Generals v. Globetrotters by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1
      The fact is, Canadians that I've known bitch more about their government (with good reason, they vote for parties, not candidates in the national election) than Americans, and that is saying alot.

      At least they get to vote by proxy. When was the last time you voted for president? (Hint: Unless you're one of less than 300 people who are part of the Electoral College, the answer is you never have, and you never will under status quo)

      Health care, blah blah...it's not like your system is perfect. Besides, Americans are too smart for free health care, we'd learn how to work the system. That's the thing...Americans are too smart to let some bastard in an office in some far away city to make their decisions for them.

      You're right. Instead, we prefer sheer inertia and smooth-lobed Californian thinking to make sure anybody seriously ill puts their children's children in debt, then when states like Oregon decide that if it's humane to put down an animal, it's humane to put down Grandma to save the pain and expense, the US tries to stop it. Whatever happened to the 10th Amendment? What good is a federal constitution if the federal government's just gonna wipe its ass with it right in front of you?

      As for your fascist point...you're wrong. Fundamentalist Mormons that are driven out of local communities in America for practicing poligamy move to where??? Canada...because it is tolerant of bigamy and child slavery i guess...where's your liberal high horse now???

      Wow, what and how much do you have to smoke to find that out?

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but Canada is the modern nation it is today because of America.

      If it weren't for the British, neither would be here. The two territories mutually benefitted technologically, Canada just didn't forget about the people that make it possible along the way. Why you think a little collective compassion is something to be held against them is beyond me. They had more influence on both countries than most Americans are comfortable admitting. But we're not speaking Spanish yet, now are we?

      --
      Help us build a better map!
    3. Re:Canada v. US = Generals v. Globetrotters by Bloggins · · Score: 1

      Sorry but we'd have to give up too much freedom to do that

    4. Re:Canada v. US = Generals v. Globetrotters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Dude, are you insane?

      I don't vote for the Liberal or Conservative party (Or NDP or Green, or Bloc Quebecois). I vote for the MPP for my riding. If the Liberal MPP for my riding wins in my riding, the Liberal's get a seat in Parliament. The party with the most seats (and a majority) forms the government, and the leader of that party, becomes Prime Minister. If no party has a majority, the previous party is given the first opportunity to attempt to form a coalition minority government (as we had until recently between the Liberal and NDP Parties).

    5. Re:Canada v. US = Generals v. Globetrotters by globaljustin · · Score: 1

      1. why can't you come up with better counterpoints?

      2. why do i even bother writing this?

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
  92. Re:Is immigration good or bad for Canada? by anitha+cn- · · Score: 1

    Most people I know here either have immigrated themselves to Canada, or their families have immigrated to Canada within the last few generations, so I would assume most people I know are either in favour or indifferent to immigration. It's not something that I hear people talking about, however, and I live in Vancouver, which seems to have a relatively high number of immigrants. Personally, it doesn't bother me if people want to immigrate to Canada.

  93. Re:Shaddup! Sick of the MRI story. by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    That's what it all boils down to, I'm afraid. The folks who want 'their' people in power will moan and complain about how things are so bad, not neccessarily because they are so bad.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  94. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by poochNik · · Score: 1

    That phrase: "it might upset their imaginary world." Are you Neo because you know REALITY but the others are lost in the Matrix? Should I be flattered that you condescend to share your insight with the rest of us?

  95. What? You never heard of Walmart? by elucido · · Score: 1

    Walmart is the largest employer.

    1. Re:What? You never heard of Walmart? by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Walmart provides health coverage and their premiums for an employee and spouse are about as much as mine are for the employee alone. Also, I suspect walmart has a large percentage of employees that are not full time.

    2. Re:What? You never heard of Walmart? by Seumas · · Score: 1

      You're sadly right in that many military familes can barely get a decent place to live that the EPA wouldn't condemn if they knew about it - much less get quality health care. It is a rare circumstance when the government can provide for you better than you can provide for yourself. That doesn't mean we shouldn't provide for those who can not provide for themselves - but we shouldn't sacrifice everyone's quality of care for it, either.

      And note that I said those who CAN NOT provide for themselves. Not those who WILL NOT. Drastic difference.

  96. Every society needs designers. by elucido · · Score: 1

    Without artists you can't have culture, or designers for all the stuff you want but don't really need.

    Face it, without artists then theres no one to handle the marketing of products, theres no one to make the movies, the music, the novels, the games and anything else which isnt essential but happens to be fun.

    If we want fun in our society, we need artists, its just a matter of making the art industry competitive (open source?, p2p? creative commons?) Who knows, but I'm guessing art does matter to most people, how much? Perhaps not as much as law, or business, but on other levels of course.

    1. Re:Every society needs designers. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Without artists you can't have culture

      I'm an American. I don't have any culture as it stands!

    2. Re:Every society needs designers. by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 1

      I'm going to have to beg to differ here. Starving artists are the ones who suck and should be starving. Successful artists are so rich that any one of them could feed all the starving artists in their state. Some idiot who went to art school and never produces something that people want to buy is not the same as Harrison Ford who makes $20 million per picture. They're both artists but only one is good at his job and produces things of value to society.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    3. Re:Every society needs designers. by Erik+Hollensbe · · Score: 1

      I can't believe you just tried to justify that.

      Starving artist joe needs to get a fucking job and be hobby artist joe until he starts getting paid to be an artist.

    4. Re:Every society needs designers. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      I can appreciate good art, but I won't pretend to know a lot about it (I was really into it as a teenager and had pieces exhibited nationally, though). While there are plenty of commissioned artists today and there are probably plenty of future greats out there producing art today that won't be appreciated until they're dead -- how did greats like Picasso survive? Did they create their masterpieces on their own and they were appreciated after death, but they survived day to day also doing comissioned works that they didn't care as much about?

      I mean, you don't have to be a starving artist and you don't have to be a commision-only sell-out, but . . . I guess I don't quite get the whole artist thing as far as making a living.

      That being said, I just don't think people should complain about the line of work they go into. If you're an artist, it's because you love art. Guess what? I like my job, but I have other passions. Why should you get the same benefits for a job you ABSOLUTELY LOVE and would do for free as I get doing a job that eats slowly away at my soul until I die a young death of over-stressed employment?!

  97. Are you experienced? by DomesticatedOnion · · Score: 1

    People who land here and look for job are in for big disappointment. Not that there are no opportunities. You need 'canadian experience' - for everything. They would rather keep the patients wait list long, than re-skill Russian and Indian immigrant doctors.

    Linus Torvalds originally thought of immigrating to Canada but couldn't get a job of sys-admin as he did not have the 'canadian-experience'. He then moved to Transmeta and the rest, as they say, is history.

    ------
    A stupid signature is better than none

  98. Re:First we take Manhattan, then we take.... Toron by Rew190 · · Score: 1

    Tragically Hip? Yuck. Come on, you guys had Skinny Puppy! Flaunt it!

  99. Your health care system is sooo good by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

    The Canadian Supreme Court ruled that people in Quebec could get private insurance because people were dying on the waiting list.

    I would assume that being able to zip down to the United States is a nice escape valve for the Canadian system.

    --
    Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
    1. Re:Your health care system is sooo good by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

      I apologize for excessive sarcasm.

      --
      Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
  100. Cool by Nasarius · · Score: 1

    Nice to see someone with a similar blend of interests/skills on Slashdot. I'd say come here to New York or even New England if you want a sane environment; there are a number of pharmaceutical research labs in the region. Personally, I'm heading to Germany or Switzerland after I finish up my education.

    --
    LOAD "SIG",8,1
  101. this thing is flamebait! by bigmaddog · · Score: 1

    No, not mine - the story. Well, okay, maybe this post is flamebait too, but do allow me to go on: The discussion has jumped straight into "Canada better than US" or "US better than Canada," and there's 400 replies at the time of this rambling, which is a metric fuckton for a Saturday evening (you Yanks may not know it, but the fuckton is an official metric measure of bullshit that the rest of the world is using). That makes it a flamebait; there's not an objective way to quantify what we're talking about, even if anyone was so inclined, which they aren't. We instead have discussions about the virtue of one and the other, ranging from the philosophical to the political all the way to the asinine. The submitter of the original story cleverly disguised the whole thing beneath a thin veil of relevance, which makes him or her a troll. And the slashdot editors are, well, slashdot editors, and it's the weekend anyway.

    I mean, we're not even arguing apples and apples here - we have two mighty white nations on the same continenet, born of the same decrepid empire, abusing their various minorities just as nicely though perhaps in slightly different ways and sharing a very similar set of values overall. If Canada had any place so warm that you could call it "the Deep South," we'd have crazy right-wing evangelical Christian nuts, too, but a good deal of them freeze every winter and what we're left with we call Alberta. And interior BC's no pro-choice-women's-rights picnic, either. Everything else is just details and misguided jingoism on both sides.

    Now I'm sure everyone has their own personal experiences on both sides of the border, and will quote them judiciously as absolute evidence of one place being better than another, but that's all horseshit. New York is a lot more like Toronto than it is like Los Angeles, and New Yorkers and Torontonians are a similar breed of asshole who have a lot more in common than, say, New Yorkers and Texans, who pack heat for fun and not for protection and who like to execture retards - we don't in Canada, but there was a time when we chopped off their nuts.

    So, in conclusion, we all fell off the same goddamn tree so let's not argue about who's got a bigger worm eating them, aight?

    --

    Even as you read this, your pants are strangling your loins! Aaa!

    1. Re:this thing is flamebait! by CriminalNerd · · Score: 1

      Actually, the discussion started out to become the basis of your call of flamebait. The story itself just asked an "innocent" question asking if anybody WOULD want to stay in Canada if given the chance. If an article posted a link to a site with pros and cons of the new consoles and asked which console the /. community would buy, would you call it flamebait? Maybe you would, but I wouldn't. Besides...nothing bad up here in Canada. Just a couple of icicles hanging from your ears once in a while...

  102. You know less than you think you do by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Try reading this, or even better the Actual Study if you want to have the opinions the mass media prefer to feed you shattered. In fact for a great education just click on the study link and read all of the articles that referred to it, all linked on that same page.

    I don't know about you, but counting gambling issues or death in the family as a "medical problem" does not seem to be playing straight. That was a study that already had an obective in mind before the writing began.

    I know you will be reluctant to believe the real truth, but at least I can help countless others pull the wool away.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:You know less than you think you do by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1
      So if someone with a political perspective that differs from yours points out some facts that make your argument look sketchy, the appropriate response is to make fun of their political views and call them names?

      You sound just like the conservatives you mock. :)

  103. The Weather by Massamune · · Score: 1

    I for one, can say that in the Okanagan region of BC, that summer is around 30 - 40 degrees Celsius, with winter temperatures seldom reaching below -10. Hardly terrible weather.

    1. Re:The Weather by Ragingguppy · · Score: 1

      What do you mean. I thought grapes for Ice Wine could only be picked at -15. Sheesh.

    2. Re:The Weather by Massamune · · Score: 1

      Actually it's -10 to -13 degrees celsius. So usually they pick the grapes as soon as it drops low enough. Don't get me wrong, it does get that cold, but on average it's very rare.

  104. We should invade canada by jdragon · · Score: 1

    Last I read, they had about 10 soldiers in their army.

    1. Re:We should invade canada by slothman32 · · Score: 1

      Everyone always makes sense of the Canadian Army.
      It probably it small but I remember reading about their help on D-Day.
      They had 5 carriers bring troops over.
      I believe 2 were British, 2 American, and 1 Canadian, or something like that.

      --
      Why don't you guys have friends or journals?
    2. Re:We should invade canada by udowish · · Score: 1

      Come try, then you will see how large our army is... Canada has only been proping up the US army since WW2 who's snipers where in Afgan? Whos snipers are in Iraq? every time your boys get into trouble its the Canuks that save your ass

      --
      when in doubt press enter and we'll figure it out later..
  105. Re:The lifestyle IS different! hours!=months by scowling · · Score: 1

    No, six hours. I had a bike accident with non-life-threatening injuries and had an MRI within an hour of getting through the emergency room line-up. And when I was diagnosed with a UTI I was sent to a specialist who saw me within minutes of getting out of the cab. And a roommate who was diagnosed with lymphoma had a battery of tests including two MRIs within three hours of his diagnosis and surgery the same day. Again, wait times are overstated; again, it's the squeaky wheel who gets the press. Getting the great service available to all Canadians regardless of income is not newsworthy. It's only in the rare occasions that it breaks down that we hear about it.

    Only typical fuckhead Americans consider Canadian arrogance typical. If we're arrogant, it's because our system works better than yours. Enjoy what you have. I sure wouldn't.

    The truth never sounds stupid. But you sure do.

    --
    www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
  106. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1
    If we fall even UBL knows Canada won't lift a finger to help us
    If you're going to use an acronym, at least make it the right acronym. It took me a few seconds to figure out what the heck UBL stood for.

    Then I realized you don't know how to spell, and it's short for Osama Bin Laden. It's not Usama.

    Now you've done gone and pissed off the terrorists by misspelling their exalted leader's first name, and they're coming to get you. Next terrorist attack in the US, we're going to blame on you, 'K? :)
    --
    "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  107. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by Cheerio+Boy · · Score: 1

    That's an urban legend. Unemployment level is determined by survey.

    Read for yourself: http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/unemploy.htm


    I stand corrected as I count SNOPES as a fairly reliable information source.

    It does raise another serious issue though - out of the full population only 60,000 homes are survey'd? I find this far too small a data sample for properly determining this data trend even if the surveys are done monthly. With data collection and sorting what it is they could certainly increase their sample size and still get timely results.

    And yes I know this goes hand in hand with the arguments as to the TLAs and their ability to gather/sort data. I'm not saying we need a sample size that large but something larger than 60k homes is needed in my opinion.

    --

    "Bah!" - Dogbert
  108. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

    Shhh you're letting the secret out.

    I swear every time I hear "gods will" on a newscast from the USA I just shake my head. That people still make decisions affecting millions of people based on what a fairytale says is just sad.

    I mean you can watch Star Trek where they visit a planet and they got a weird policy like the TNG where they kill all the people after 65 and go "OMG THATS TOTALLY FUNNY WHAT A SILLY POLICY!"

    Then you look at the USA where they still have capital punishment, bans [on religious grounds] on stem cell harvesting, cloning, gay marriage and other issues, then the pledge is being held up as "under god" [even though the original didn't have that] and the 10 commandments are being installed everywhere...

    Really how different is it? You have policies instituted on a whim from an interpretation from a child bedtime story book from 1500 years ago!!!

    And I say this as someone who is about to visit the USA this week. :-)

    One thing going for the states. What they do well they do really well. In San Diego [where I'm heading] the service industry is thriving and really positive [have yet to see a bad restaurant] and the place is clean and well kept. But what you guys do poorly you really suck at. Like carting off your constitutional rights as if they're a bad fad...

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  109. Lifestyle, sure. Weather, no way. by wheatwilliams · · Score: 1

    I could never survive in Canada. I've spent my whole life in Georgia and Tennessee where it virtually never stays below freezing for more than a couple of days at a time.

  110. Re:Don't beleive anything from the Liberals by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    Oh great. Why do I have a feeling you consider yourself a conservative?

    A conservative would look back and realise that most of the stuff they want to fix today is relatively new.

    The big thing the Liberals did in their first terms in office? They balanced the budget. They spent entirely too much time, money and effort on trying to keep Quebec from seperating. These were massive things at the time. Sure, there was some pork along the way, but frankly, the stuff which is about to destroy the Martin government is the sort of stuff that happens without raising an eyebrow in the US.

    The Progressive Conservatives under Mulroney DOUBLED the federal debt. Remember that when you're talking about things the Liberals were doing for all those 12 years. 250 Billion dollars. Yes, the Liberals are responsible for the initial spending which led to the debt, but the conservatives are the ones who allowed it to double our debt, and it was the Liberals who came in and actually did what needed to be done to fix it.

    Canadians often remind me of Marie Antoinette: They're so out of touch with the concept of a truly bad politician, and so far removed from any sort of context -- let alone HISTORY, that they think that their politicians are all bad, when the truth of the matter is, we have it so good that we can complain about pittling 200 million dollar ad contracts, or our taxes, or our balanced budget.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  111. Waiting to see specialists by lorcha · · Score: 1

    I have never had to wait more than 48 hours to see a specialist in the Washington DC area. As far as MRIs go, which is a serious problem in Canada, I can get in for a non-emergency MRI within 5 hours. YMMV.

    --
    "Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
  112. Why thanks! by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Whenever someone cannot do anything but seek to call me names, without the bother of a counter-argument - then I know I've won. As I said, I posted to to convince you but to cancel out what misguided confusion you may have spawned.

    So I take it the actual study was to difficult for to read? I find it disturbing that no-one now will actually have a debate on anything and instead just choose to call them an ass. Sure the blogger is very right wind (probably one of the most) but read the study itself, and the MANY links from it that point to issues with the study. Why would you trust any study without further thought?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Why thanks! by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Oh, great. You've already won.

      Well, no reason to try to continue then. Have a nice day.

      --
      It's been a long time.
  113. Re:Don't beleive anything from the Liberals by Ummu · · Score: 1

    *claps* Well, we _do_ need to complain about something, or we wouldn't be a true democracy.

  114. Mod Parent UP! by Cadallin · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up!

  115. I was born in Canada... by Barbarian · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..when do I get my entitlement?

  116. Some numbers to compare Canada and USA by EMB+Numbers · · Score: 2, Informative

    Let me say that I enjoy the Canadian way of life myself, but let's look at some numbers:

    Source: http://www.worldfactsandfigures.com/gdp_country_de sc.php [worldfactsandfigures.com]
    GDP per capita Canada: $29,700
    GDP per capita USA: $37,800

    Source: http://www.readersdigest.ca/mag/1999/06/think_01.h tml [readersdigest.ca]
    National average total taxation Canada: 48.2 %
    National average total taxation USA: 41.4 %

    Source: http://www.statcan.ca/english/Subjects/Labour/LFS/ lfs-en.htm [statcan.ca]
    National unemployment rate Canada: 6.6%
    National unemployment rate USA: 4.9%

    Source: http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/040728/d040728 a.htm [statcan.ca] & http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm [disastercenter.com]
    Total Violent crime per 100,000 people Canada: 963
    Total violent crime per 100,000 people in USA: 466

    By all of these measures you are better off in the USA.

    [This may be a duplicate of a previous Anonymous Coward posting that I did not intend.]

  117. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by smchris · · Score: 1

    I presume you're talking about the US - one of the most socialist countries on the planet (or have you opted out of the endless socialist pork projects,

    You leave out the crucial adjective. The U.S. has _National_ Socialism (i.e. fascist rule by the corporations) -- a socialism of a different color than national health and utilities.

  118. Re:Some numbers to compare Canada and USA by emagery · · Score: 1

    I also hear (my sister spent a short amount of time married to a canadian) that the wait time for medical care in Canada can be quite long, depending, of course, on where in canada you are and what you are waiting for. Here, south of the border, you can get it a little faster... the tradeoff is that you put your family in debt for the next 3 generations doing so. =P

  119. I can *Buy* Eiswein and still live here by billstewart · · Score: 1
    ... and I can drink the local Cabernets while I'm here.


    Ok, I moved from New Jersey to California more for the culture than the weather, but I've gotten used to it. I see frost every couple of years in Silicon Valley. If I *want* snow, I can drive or fly to it, and the main problem with driving to it is that Californians don't know how to drive in snow...

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  120. who needs qualified engineers? by orbit86 · · Score: 1

    we don't need no stinking qualified competent engineer or excellent programmer..!!! shhhhuuuu good engineers..

  121. Vancouver vs. The Frozen North by billstewart · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Last time I seriously thought about moving to Canada I drew a decent number in the draft lottery and stopped worrying about it, but it would have been a much easier decision if I'd seen Vancouver instead of just The Frozen North, which (as an East-Coaster) were the parts of Canada I'd seen. Montreal's nice in the summer, as is Toronto, and Sudbury's ugly year-round just like the US industrial cities on the other side of the lakes, but they're all Too Cold in the winter, and they start winter too early. (I went to college in upstate New York - it's pretty much the same thing. Winter's beautiful there, but too much hassle.)

    Vancouver's great, and it's on my list of cities I'd move to if I really wanted to get out of San Francisco Bay Area or out of the US. Weather's like Seattle, culture's interesting, coffee's good, and you can get out of town easily. And as far as "would I move to a different country with similar culture", I moved from New Jersey to San Francisco; moving to Vancouver wouldn't be as big a change. Moving to Toronto would be, because it'd be moving back to a culture with winter.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  122. This is not for Americans! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The program is for "skilled workers"

  123. Recertification by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    One problem that Canada has is that any new skilled immigrant who wants to becomes a doctor or engineer is forced to do a three certfication. This means that a worker loses out three years of salery, when instead (s)he could be heading south of the border. South of the border that would not be necessary and they would also be better paid.

    So immigrate to the US or to Canada. Hmmm?

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  124. Re:First we take Manhattan, then we take.... Toron by ashitaka · · Score: 1

    Your treading the footsteps I took 20 years ago. I left Toronto because I just didn't feel like I belonged. I ended up lving in Tokyo for 10 years.

    I did end up starting a company, getting married and having kids whilst there and in the end it was the kids that brought us back to Canada. Education is of primary importance to us and we just could not get it there, not even at the International schools.

    We could have gone just about anywhere (I have British citizenship by birth) but ended up in Vancouver for many of the reasons that have been stated in this thread. Good schools, good weather (if you don't mind some rain), mountains, sea, minimal violent crime, close enough to Japan that we can go back now and then.

    I'm much more of a soccer fan than hockey (being British may have something to do with that) so not being a hockey fan won't be an issue. You may even learnto like the Canadian Footbal league.

    --
    If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
  125. Secure by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

    The US really isn't that insecure. It's a remarkably safe country. Nevertheless, Americans seem to live in constant terror of everything, whether it's the British, communists, terrorists, blacks, liberals, neocons, or whatever. An entire nation of panicky cowards with guns.

  126. Specialists by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1
    3 months may not seem very good, but keep in mind that most Americans NEVER get to see a specialist. The affluent don't have to wait, but that's because they don't have to worry about the rest of the population getting in the way.

    If you actually look at ALL Americans, our wait times suddenly look pretty reasonable.

  127. Re:First we take Manhattan, then we take.... Toron by mr.mighty · · Score: 1

    Not a problem. It's our dirty little secret, but not everybody in Canada loves hockey or Tim Horton's. I was born and raised here, but never learned to like Tim's. And I'm the only hockey fan in my family.

  128. Re:Some numbers to compare Canada and USA by Reziac · · Score: 1

    How much skew comes from the horrendous unemployment situation in the Maritimes? that is, how would Canada west of Quebec compare to the US?

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  129. Re:Lengths? What Lengths? by Reziac · · Score: 1

    I was a lot more liberal about immigration before I moved to SoCal. Over the past two decades, thanks to problems like what you cite, I've become a proponent of gun turrets at the border :( If CA wasn't supporting millions of illegals, CA could afford to support its *citizens*.

    A good deal of the problem could be halted by doing away with automatic citizenship for the spawn of illegal aliens (it made sense when America was labour-poor, but those days are long gone). In other countries, a baby is a citizen of wherever its *parents* are citizens. Why should they expect different of American?

    But oh, no, it's far too politically incorrect for *Americans* to resent being overrun by invaders from another country.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  130. Re:No philosophy degree required by i41Overlord · · Score: 1

    You seem to be the typical ultra-liberal limpwrist that has no political influence and is mad about it.

    If Kerry didn't win the election, why would your favorite candidate have any chance? From your bashing of Kerry, I have a feeling that Kerry is still far too right-leaning for you.

    And what do these all these limpwristed psuedointellectuals have against football? The football stadiums are there because the people want the stadiums there. They get enjoyment from watching the games.

    All these leftists cry about not having a voice, but what kind of democracy would we live in if the majority of the population didn't control the country? I'm sure you'd rather ignore the majority and install a radical liberal candidate that only a tiny fraction of the population actually wants. Yeah, that would be a great democracy.

    And before you bark up the wrong tree, NO, I didn't vote for Bush.

  131. Canada Moves... by chiok · · Score: 1

    So, where did Canada move to? Hopefully somewhere warmer.

  132. Re:Hear! Hear! US has flag on moon ... Canada noth by Fox_1 · · Score: 1

    Canadian engineers were crucial to the early U.S. human space program. NASA hired over 30 engineers from the Avro Arrow program (mach 2 fighter) which was cancelled by the Canadian Government in 1959. These engineers were involved in Mercury, Gemini and Apollo (putting Americans into space). To be honest some of them were British, but working in Canada prior to going to the US.

    What this whole issue really is about is illustrated by that anecdote about the Canadian's building the US space program, the Brain Drain. Skilled workers can be lured away by high paying jobs in the US and other countries, that's a loss to Canadian companies certainly, but it also impacts the country as a whole when these skilled workers advance their field in another country - ie: sending Americans to space with Canadian know how. Our Universities train a lot of bright people, many of them from other countries. This proposal is designed to encourage them to stay in Canada after their education is complete, and to bring in other professionals from other countries. Reversing the Brain Drain effect and encouraging the growth of many different industries in Canada.

    --
    The rock, the vulture, and the chain
  133. Freezing you Ass Off by asleep-at-keyboard · · Score: 1

    I still can't figure out what's so great about Canada. Unless you're really into: -Freezing your Ass Off -Hockey -Only have 1 1/2 months of summer -Freezing your Ass Off -No Jobs -Shitty Health Care (You people in in denial) -Pompous, Stinky French Wannabes (Napolean is dead, You're not related to him, and being french doesn't make you suave)... oh, and the language doesn't sound cool, it sounds like a whiney bitch on prozak -Freezing your Ass off -Roots clothing - I'm sorry, people who wear those clothes are retarded -Bashing America - Bunch of Ungrateful Haters

    1. Re:Freezing you Ass Off by slothman32 · · Score: 1

      I personally like the cold weather.
      You can snuggle under a warm blanket with a roaring fire.
      "White Christmas" wasn't written in the south.
      In some summers it is very humid and you can't do much.
      Or it is very dry and that isn't much better.
      Plus I like the fact that bugs aren't crawling everywhere.
      I even think brushing snow off my car is fun.

      As for health care, what if you are poor?
      They can't aford it much here. Except for emergency.
      Yeah it isn't as good but at least they have it.
      It's for the same reason people go to third-world countries for stuff like operations.
      Rather than paying 100k, more than a year's salary for many people, they go to Mexico even, pay 5k, and 5k for travel, with only slightly less quality. Really good quality if they can't afford it here.

      French people in Canada, Quebec somehow got the entire country to make French an offical language. At least they use the metric system. hehe

      What is roots clothing?

      --
      Why don't you guys have friends or journals?
  134. Important distinction. by Foerstner · · Score: 1

    Immigration is mainly by people in the lower class, where they stand to benefit by moving to the USA.

    Illegal immigration is mainly by people in the lower class. Legal immigration strongly favors those with knowledge or skills that are considered beneficial (ie, profitable) to the US. (Even the much-derided H-1B visa holders pay taxes, for example.)

    --
    The US free market: two halves of a government-granted duopoly are free to set the market price.
  135. Canada is still a great option by toby · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Trying to find a family doctor is nearly impossible,

    Maybe in your district. This month in Toronto I found one in about 20 minutes using the Physicians directory. (Despite the dribble of objections from the middle class who have captured the notion that privatisation solves everything, some level of public health service is necessary in a socially just state. That's one big point in Canada's favour...)

    (What does "excessive snow" actually mean? How is snow "excessive"? It's snow, for goodness' sake. If you have such a problem with it, sure, you probably want to live somewhere else, at least for those couple of months (Dec/Jan/Feb in Toronto). Frankly, I find the Toronto Summer much harder to cope with than the Winter...)

    I can't buy a fully-detached house with two car garage for under $400k,

    Have you priced that in any other first world country lately? Then try pricing one in Europe. Canada's real estate prices are quite reasonable compared to comparable New World cities of my acquaintance.

    As for education, I cannot comment on the elementary levels, since I'm personally done with that phase. I'm sorry if it's not working out with your kids. However, should I choose tertiary, I know that the cities I'm familiar with - Toronto, Montreal - boast many world class institutions. So presumably you weren't talking about university level "education".

    On the subject of city life: The infrastructure Just Works(TM); there is clean and efficient public transport (Montreal's Metro can hold its own with any city's); the streets of Toronto are (still) much safer than US cities; Canadians are incredibly, touchingly polite and civil; they read books; they are informed and interested in things outside their own borders; etc.

    several times reporters were spied on, wiretapped or just simply had their personal files confiscated without a warrant by corrupt police who feel that due process is an inconvenience.

    I can't think of a "democracy" where that hasn't happened from time to time. Ditto for the corruption/kickback/etc things that I'm sorry to say are not uniquely Canadian. Put that one down to human nature: "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance," n'est-ce pas? We can still hope that something less than armed revolution is necessary to keep a Canadian government (relatively) honest...

    There are 36,000 deportation orders on illegal immigrants that can't be executed because the government doesn't know where they are.

    I don't think this situation is unique to Canada by any means. It is effectively impossible to locate every alien who doesn't want to be found and deported, especially given Canada's geography. Sure, with a few hundred million thrown at the problem, you could find maybe 70% of them (volunteering your tax dollars?) That last few percent just won't ever be found... could just be they really want to live here! (Duh.)

    If you think you're going to...satisfy your ideological cravings by coming up to Canada, you are gravely mistaken

    Au contraire. I moved here largely for ideological reasons. Canada did not support the Iraq occupation nor the Vietnam adventure, unlike my previous country of residence. I believe in voting with one's passport and Canada's values as a nation do not make me sick to my heart. The arrogance is at least partly justified; and a healthy and judicious distaste for today's America puts Canadians who feel that way in very good company worldwide.

    Canada is able to lay claim to more than its fair share of progressive thinkers. Heck, I hear it's one of only 4 countries in the world that countenances gay marriage, and won't give you a life sentence for a couple of grams of dope. Which reminds me. We're METRIC! If that's not enough to make you want to live here, then nothing will...

    --
    you had me at #!
    1. Re:Canada is still a great option by Doctor_Jest · · Score: 1

      It's funny... but every argument can be used for (or against) any country. That's the beauty of the world... it's more vast than we perceive it to be.

      "It's not perfect, but it's better than X"... The problem is (as people have noted already in the thread), people think it _IS_ perfect in Canada. For whatever reason, they hate where they live now (US, Europe, whathaveyou), and the entire country looks inviting based on brochures and anecdotal evidence from residents (or those wishing they were... this is the internet, you can't always be sure...heh) The trouble with that is, obviously, people will be disappointed beyond measure when their idealistic view of Canada doesn't jive with the reality. I am not saying Canada's horrible, in fact, I'm sure it's a nice place to live... but like every place on the planet, there are warts. The US isn't perfect, but I like living here (and yes, I've lived elsewhere... I travel quite a bit, and there are a few places I'd still like to visit before I die..) I still firmly believe in our Constitution, and I will do all that is in my power to protect it from harm. I am not jingoistic, but I do cherish the freedoms that document puts into writing.

      Did Canada support the French occupation of Vietnam? (I'm just curious...)

      Metric schmetric. ;) I use both. :P

      --
      It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
    2. Re:Canada is still a great option by toby · · Score: 1
      people will be disappointed beyond measure when their idealistic view of Canada doesn't jive with the reality

      Ignore my message if you wish: but to repeat, I am not one of those people; I am more comfortable to call Canada home than the terminally Americanised country left behind. Perhaps if you had made a similar experiment you would be less inclined to deny the potential rewards of emigration. I am not the first to find greater quality of life and I will not be the last.

      As for the USA being "not perfect," I can only hope your gift for understatement is matched by an urge to help put its self-destructive (arguably universally destructive) engines into hard reverse. It appears the iceberg was struck some time ago, however, so better look for a lifeboat.

      --
      you had me at #!
    3. Re:Canada is still a great option by Doctor_Jest · · Score: 1

      Now, did I say you were? Did I say everyone would be disappointed? Thanks for reading... I said people who hold Canada on this pedestal that is impossible to meet with reality. NOT everyone. I even qualified my statement. I should've put "but not you, oh great and enlightened person." so you could follow along.

      People != just you, pal. The world doesn't revolve around you, the US, or Canada. I didn't say anything ill towards Canada, and was being quite nice about the whole thing, but you seem to hate and loathe the United States so much, you can't see that and turn a nice conversation into a "boy am I glad I made it out alive" speech that just makes you look paranoid and delusional.

      Glad you like Canada. My advice. Stay there. I couldn't give two monkeys if you hate America. It's people like you who's "gift of overstatement" makes me ill. I couldn't give two monkeys what other people think, period. But then again, that must make me an "angry, ugly, American."

      Some people don't hold your hyperbolic diaper-wetting view of their home country. If you feel you are in the majority... it's you who have hit the iceberg. The US has been in worse situations and has done quite well for itself. It's not in a total tailspin... but you can't see that.... because you hate it so much.

      Good for you. Now move along.

      Don't bother responding. You've killed this thread.

      --
      It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
  136. Keep Canadians first! by overkil6 · · Score: 1

    As a Canadian I find this posting a little ironic. Many Canadians themsevles leave the country in what the government refers to as a 'brain drain'. Most go to the US but others, like myself, go to Europe. Canada just can't compete on the pay scale that other counties offer plus you get a cultural experience that you wouldn't get at home.

  137. Re:First we take Manhattan, then we take.... Toron by kamapuaa · · Score: 1
    If you think America's politics are fucked up, why did you move to Japan? Their quasi-fascist state does everything the US tells it too anyway, plus it's wildly racist against foreigners (racist creeds against Koreans and Chinese are recent #1 best sellers - from personal experience I can say police will stop me on the street to check my papers). Conviction rates approach 100%, country-area votes count up to four times what city-area votes do, Nanking deniers are given positions of authority (imagine Bush doubting the Holocaust), the press is tightly controlled by the government - the list just goes on.

    Japan's government is by far the least likable of any first world nation, and quite a bit behind even many 3rd world nations. Sure you can be ignorant about the government and just enjoy life - but that's true in the US just as much as Japan, right?

    --
    Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
  138. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by birge · · Score: 1

    Yeah, the columbian stock market is up, too. What's your point?

  139. In America you can have your own city by RITMaloney · · Score: 1

    In America, if you really hate your neighbors you can move to your own city! In these cases Dearborn, Michigan* and San Francisco respectively. It's a good thing those two cities are so far apart because last I checked the local Imams weren't infavor of protecting sexual orientation under anti-discrimintation laws and Richard Simmons wasn't getting on his knees and facing west five times a day. *http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q =Dearborn%2C+Michigan+Muslims+largest

    1. Re:In America you can have your own city by killjoe · · Score: 1

      This is just a logical outcome of being reviled by society at large. Persecuted minorities will gather together in groups in order to protect themselves. This is also why places like chinatown exist.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  140. I'd Do It by Cheirdal · · Score: 1

    If it wasn't for my family and friends, I'd move to Canada in a heartbeat. I hate the corrupt U.S. politicians and what they're doing to our country. My father being buried in Arlington also gives me pause. He fought for this country and believed in it. I'd hate to let evil people like Bush and Cheney run me out of a great country. I also prefer the snow and cooler climate. I know most people hate those things but I love the snow.

  141. Germany is cool too, no pun intended! by ami-in-hamburg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I moved from Arizona to Hamburg, Germany just over a year ago. The best move I've ever made. I make a little more money than the US national average for a Unix Admin but the cost of living here is much lower than Phoenix or my other recent home San Diego, CA.

    The health care system here is also socialized but with an option for private health care (either exclusive or in addition to) your basic health care.

    Naturally there is the language problem. You can live here if you don't speak German but it would be very very difficult. For me, that's not a problem though.

    The immigration laws are extremely strict for most nationalities but not nearly as bad for Americans. They do kindof use a Catch22 system though. You can't get residence permission without employment and a registered address here. You can't rent an apartment or get a job without residence permission though. There are loopholes but it's tough.

    Of course, if anyone in your family tree, has or had, even the slightest percentage of German blood you can get citizenship pretty easily.

    If you're married to a German, you don't have to change your citizenship to live here. Of course you can if you want to but it's not required which is my case.

    Crime is extremely low everywhere and the weather is similar to the Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York region.

    The IT market is somewhat thin, similar to the US, but there are plenty of jobs out there.

  142. Re:Some numbers to compare Canada and USA by CyberLife · · Score: 1

    Isn't it interesting how statistics can be presented to prove anyone's point? Canada has about 1/10th the population of the U.S. Factoring that into the equation, the U.S. has about six times the number of unemployed people and about five times as many violent crimes.

  143. Ok, your right, US is better by Bloggins · · Score: 1

    Psst CANADIANS, over here in the corner..... Now we've said too much already... I don't know who started this but someone's in trouble. We'll figure this out later.. For now just go back there, agree with everything they say about their country being better and maybe they'll forget this came up.... I know, someone shout "look there goes a Taliban"

  144. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by Troed · · Score: 1

    Osama bin Laden died quite a while ago. However, that's not what your Leader wants you to believe, and thus you might not know about it.

    Fear Osama. Vote for your Leader. Be a good Citizen.

    Osama bin Laden - dead

  145. Re:Lengths? What Lengths? by uncommonlygood · · Score: 1
    If CA wasn't supporting millions of illegals, CA could afford to support its *citizens*.

    ...there'd just be no-one to pump your gas.

    I do wonder what you mean by supporting millions of illegals. Do you really think they cross the border then think, Hmm.. now I'm in the land of plenty, I think I'll get tuberculosis, just to make the best of it.

    Would you ever consider that the reason your public services are crap is because you are scared of taxes, not to mention you voted in the f***ing terminator for governor. If you paid your teachers the schools would be happier, if you paid they police they wouldn't be corrupt, if you paid the doctors and nurses you'd have more of them.

  146. EIGHTEEN MONTHS and still waiting by kt0157 · · Score: 1

    My skilled worker application has been in 18 months and I'm still waiting. I have plenty of points (a PhD in computing, cash to invest, a wife with a degree, ten years running a company, fluent in English, still in my 30s). My cousin, similarly qualified, has just put his application in, and he's been told not to even think about calling for THREE YEARS.

    What a mess. Makes the US look like a well-adminstered nation.

    K.

    1. Re:EIGHTEEN MONTHS and still waiting by Malc · · Score: 1

      I think there is a shortage of cash that they're trying to rectify. It's resulted in long waits unfortunately. You probably don't want to hear, but my PR application took 8 months to process back in 2000. My citizenship application this year took 10 months.

  147. Frozen? Ha! 40C in Montreal this summer by kt0157 · · Score: 1

    I've never been in such a whacky country. 40C in Summer. -40 in Winter. That's amazing.

    Anyone in Toronto this summer wouldn't have said "frozen" as the response to "Canada" in the word-association game. My worry on immigrating is not cold, but how I can get aircon working when the Ontario Hydro is in such a mess (hint to Ontarians: PUT THE PRICE OF ELECTRICITY UP).

    K.

  148. It's about having your cake and eating it too. by Ivan+Matveitch · · Score: 1
    On continental Europe, policies that protect jobs have led to youth unemployment and social immobility. In America, economic liberalism creates opportunity, but also job insecurity. An American is only encouraged in his labors when the rich get richer; he reasons that one day he will take his rightful place among them. A European, resigned to his lot in life, instead feels envy and demands more taxes.

    No one has yet proved intelligent enough to marry American hope and European security. Thus practical choice is inevitable, and the liberal policies you mention are a sign that, for better or for worse, hope has gained the upper hand.

  149. Heh. by Ivan+Matveitch · · Score: 1
    The enemies of liberalism deem America their enemy number one, though.

    Capitalist enough to hate, apparently.

  150. Re:No philosophy degree required by jnelson4765 · · Score: 1
    And what do these all these limpwristed psuedointellectuals have against football? The football stadiums are there because the people want the stadiums there. They get enjoyment from watching the games.

    Um, do you honestly think the American people have anything to say whatsoever about the siting of stadiums? They are built by and for the elites of a region, normally with back-door deals with corrupt politicians.

    All these leftists cry about not having a voice, but what kind of democracy would we live in if the majority of the population didn't control the country? I'm sure you'd rather ignore the majority and install a radical liberal candidate that only a tiny fraction of the population actually wants. Yeah, that would be a great democracy.

    BWA-HAAAA-HAAAAAAA!! You actually think this country is run by a majority? Now that's rich.

    This country has never been run by a majority - the Founding Fathers actually had a deep mistrust of democracy, and made sure that the landowners and elites would have their hands firmly on the reins of power. Originally, Senators were not even elected by the people - and the President still isn't!

    I don't give a fuck about some idealogical "democracy" - I care if my fellow Americans are doing all right. Anything that makes the majority of Americans do better than they are right now (without looting/raping/pillaging/etc) is a good thing in my book. And if that involves another FDR running roughshod over the laws of this country, well I'll call that a damn good thing.

    When the laws in a country are unjust, it is the duty of its citizenry to resist, and if necessary, overthrow that oppressive government.

    And before you bark up the wrong tree, NO, I didn't vote for Bush.

    Yep - you voted for Badnarik. Obviously.

    --
    Why can't I mod "-1 Idiot"?
  151. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by Nolkyan · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Also, Canada has the second largest oil reserves in the world." Yes, sir, Mister President, I do believe Canada is intending to use weapons of mass destruction against us.

  152. Re:First we take Manhattan, then we take.... Toron by ameline · · Score: 1

    Sorry -- it's right there on the citizenship test -- Who scored the winning goal in the 1972 Canada cup series between Canada and the Soviet Union?

    If you can't answer correctly, they will deport you the same day.

    --
    Ian Ameline
  153. Wish I had mod points for this! by Seek_1 · · Score: 1

    .. cause it sums up my feelings exactly.

  154. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by JohnWiney · · Score: 1

    The numbers are not comparable - the two countries have different ways of doing the statistics. Basically, the US definition of "now longer looking for work" kicks in a lot sooner than does the Canadian definition.

  155. Re:Is immigration good or bad for Canada? by JohnWiney · · Score: 1

    As a general rule, the answer to this is yes. Currently, immigration amounts to about 1% of population - the highest level in the world. A few months back, the government proposed substantial increases in the numbers. It couldn't do that if the people didn't support it. The biggest complaint is that most immigrants go to the big population centres - mainly Toronto and Vancouver. The other regions of the country want their share, because of the benefits to the economy, and several have started programs to attract more.

  156. That's why I'm thinking about the Philippines by daviddennis · · Score: 1

    People still speak English and if you can scrape up US$1,500 a month, you're almost rich. $4,000 a month will rent you a house in a top subdivision with all the maids, security guards and dancing girls you would ever want.

    Of course you have to get that money from a business or pension based elsewhere. Income opportunities there are almost non-existant, with a typical skilled worker wage in the $5 a day range. Business opportunities are there for the creative, but most people who come in with the idea of earning money there fail quickly due to a combination of intense competition and not understanding the culture.

    See:

    http://www.livingincebu.com/ (their discussion forums are particularly good)
    http://www.livinginthephilippines.com/

    for more detailed information.

    D

  157. I am probably doing it (not canada though) by fire-eyes · · Score: 1

    I am probably doing this. Though it's to the Netherlands. The main reason isn't that I am upset with our government, or anything like that. However, the more I think about it, I am pretty pissed off about all that. So it just becomes another reason.

    I've been to Canada too (it's about 1/2 mile from me). Very nice people, and it's a pretty country. I could see living there.

    --
    -- Note: If you don't agree with me, don't bother replying. I won't read it.
  158. Re:Bullsh*t by Shajenko42 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    You see, if you work for a living, you have access to great healthcare.
    Not if you work at Wal-Mart.
  159. Re:Lengths? What Lengths? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    ...there'd just be no-one to pump your gas.

    So who was pumping all the gas before there were 10 million illegals in the country? Industrial robots?

    Maybe if you stopped to think a second you would realize that the reason such menial jobs pay so little is because of the labor market distortions introduced by unchecked immigration. If that distortion were corrected, wages would rise until those jobs were filled by legal workers. It's as simple as that.

  160. Except at... by pmsyyz · · Score: 1
    --
    Phillip
  161. Re:No philosophy degree required by i41Overlord · · Score: 1

    Um, do you honestly think the American people have anything to say whatsoever about the siting of stadiums? They are built by and for the elites of a region, normally with back-door deals with corrupt politicians.

    If they didn't think the people of that region would fill the stadium to watch the games, they wouldn't build it there. No matter how corrupt you think those businessmen are, they certainly aren't out to lose money- they'll built it where the demand is, where they'll sell tickets.

  162. Re:No philosophy degree required by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

    I don't have to admit that, or even beleive it.

    You stated that all of us were lambasting you, and my contention is that not only were not all of us lambasting you, but not even a majority of people were lambasting you. In fact, if you're talking about /. I'd say probably 1 in 50 were lambasting you. Bush has his supporters, but supporting Bush these days tends to get you into an argument with almost everyone so the majority of Bush supporters I've met generally just roll there eyes in mixed company because it's not worth arguing for the one thousandth time that Bush didn't make up the unlawful combatent term or that America should be invading Sudan to save the Dafurians.

    Bush has his supporters, but how many of them are violently outspoken here? Any time he's mentioned I look past ten comments that I want to reply to but don't bother with becasue it's a never ending hassel. I don't even like Bush.

  163. Re:Lengths? What Lengths? by Reziac · · Score: 1

    Spoken like someone who believes in "entitlement"...

    No, the #1 reason public schools in CA are crap is because 80% of the school budget goes for ADMINISTRATION. Only 20% goes to pay teachers, supply classrooms, and keep facilities in good repair.

    Cops here have a starting salary around $45,000. Find me another entry-level position that's paid so well after only 3 months of training?? Nurses make about the same and doctors a whole shitload more; the problem for private practice is the malpractice insurance -- some are paying out 75% of their gross income just for that. Even so, things can't be too bad -- or doctors would be leaving CA in droves, like they've left the Maritime provinces. Try to find an oncologist in Nova Scotia, anywhere but in Halifax.

    As to social services for those of us who can't afford insurance or private doctors -- the reason I, a taxpaying citizen, have to wait in line for 8 hours to get five minutes of some Pakistani intern's time, is because 90% of the other people in line are illegal aliens and there are only so many tax dollars to go around, and illegals seldom pay their fair share regardless.

    It isn't America's job to support everyone else in the world, just like it's not their job to support us. But somehow America is expected to give and give and give, and that's taught the rest of the world to behave like professional beggars. Mexico has more natural wealth than America, yet is a poor country. Why? Corruption at every level. But instead of staying home and fixing the problem, they come here and bring their attitudes with them.

    If your country is so bad, fix it; don't drag your problems here. If you come to my country, live like an American, don't expect ME to change my lifestyle and language for you. And if the old country is so wonderful that you simply MUST bring all its ways here (and inflict them on me) -- STAY IN THE OLD COUNTRY.

    As to "people to pump your gas" -- out of all the places I've been, the level of service here is absolutely the worst, and getting worse all the time.

    And at least the Terminator doesn't beat up his secretary, like a certain predecessor did.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  164. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  165. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

    > First off, if I had to choose between the Christian Fundamentalists, or the Islamic Fundamentalists,
    > I'd rather go with the latter.

    At least you have the guts to admit which side you are rooting for. Gotta give you that much. Brave, honest and totally fucking insane.

    First off, if you think the USA is tottering on the virge of becoming some sort of theocracy and launching a fresh Inquisition or something, then you are totally divorced from objective reality.

    Second, even IF we are/become a 'Christian fundamentalist' nation to believe that would be worse than dhimitude under Islamic rule (and yes my Athestic friend, Dhimitude would be the best fate you could hope for, some interpretations of the Koran put you lower than Christians and Jews) shows, at best, a shocking ignorance and at worst self destructive tendencies. The views of a person like Jerry Falwell would be an average Christian cleric a hundred years ago, there was almost no public debate as to whether this was a 'Christian nation' because it was an accepted reality. But there was little religious persecution of rival Christian sects or of differing religions. (Ok, the Klan down here in the Old South hates Jews almost as much as they hate blacks, then and now. Notable for the exception to the prevailing rule though) Jewish temples and some (just not many followers of Islam in the US a hundred years ago) Mosques operated openly and without any real fear. Compare and contrast to any country with a majority Islamic population, now, a hundred years ago or at any other point on the timeline of history.

    Of course if I had to guess I'd say that what this is really all about is that you hate Bush so hard it has distorted you sense of reality. Nothing else matters, if Bush came out for National Health Care you would oppose it just because HE was now for it. To admit radical Islam is THE threat to the Western World would be to admit Bush was right and you guys just can't do it, preferring to risk destruction of our whole civilization.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
  166. Re:Some numbers to compare Canada and USA by puppetman · · Score: 1

    The numbers for many of these stats are computed differently.

    In the US, if you stop looking for work, you are (apparently) no longer unemployed, even though you never found a job. In Canada, you maintain your unemployed status.

    In the US, to be considered a victim of a violent crime, you have to take a bullet to the head. In Cahada, to be a victim of violet crime, someone has to accidentally bump you in the checkout line at the supermarket and not say, "Sorry".

    Different standards, different results.

  167. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

    > Osama bin Laden died quite a while ago.

    I thought so too for a year or so. But then the bastard popped up on Al-Jazera speaking of current events. So that pretty much proved he survived Afganistan. Why he hasn't been seen since that one appearance is troubling.

    But at any rate I don't make the mistake of conflating the man with the movement. If UBL does go to Hell it won't really change things, others will take up his unfinished work. To win we must defeat not the man, but the Idea he represents.

    You see, the battle is one of substance over ideas. Specifically it is a referendum on Western Civilization. Are the ideas it embodies worth emulating or should they be rejected. Ideas like representive governments, womens sufferage, religious and racial tolerance, secular government, free speech and a free press. We believe in these things. They believe them to be perversions.

    Once side with prevail. But our side is at a disadvantage, because we are currently divided into two warring camps. Socialists and Conservatives, and because the Socialists are frightened, that because a Conservative (and especially since they HATE Bush with such a blinding rage) is currently in power should they close ranks and fight this fight that it would end up leaving Conservatives politically advantaged when the dust settled, they pick the side of primitive howling barbarian madness over Civilization. Because in the end, Socialists believe that if THEY are not to be given supreme power then the world can burn for all they care.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
  168. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  169. Re:Some numbers to compare Canada and USA by slothman32 · · Score: 1

    @GDP per capita Canada: $29,700
    @GDP per capita USA: $37,800
    What's the standard of living?

    @National average total taxation Canada: 48.2 %
    @National average total taxation USA: 41.4 %
    What about local?
    Where does the money go.

    @National unemployment rate Canada: 6.6%
    @National unemployment rate USA: 4.9%
    Do the unemployed live in slums?
    Are they as bad?
    Well that is probably but it might not be.

    @Total Violent crime per 100,000 people Canada: 963
    @Total violent crime per 100,000 people in USA: 466
    Where are those crimes? Small towns or large? East or west?
    Maybe most the violent crimes in Canada happen in Toronto.

    Everything can't be compared simply with 2 percent numbers.
    Give me a little more information, well alot, and I can turn the apples and oranges into green apples and red apples, i.e. better to compare.

    --
    Why don't you guys have friends or journals?
  170. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by larry_larry · · Score: 1

    RE: "Also, Canada has the second largest oil reserves in the world." Yes, sir, Mister President, I do believe Canada is intending to use weapons of mass destruction against us. No need for the ole' weapons of mass destruction tactics... I imagine US multinationals already own the majority of it :)

  171. Private Healthcare IS legal in Canada by BallyHigh · · Score: 1

    Actually, the Canadian Health Care system was declared unconstitutional just this year by our Supreme Court, so yes private health care is now legal in our nation:
    http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/06/09 /newscoc-health050609.html/.
    Not that this decision mattered much, as private health insurance has been available in Vancouver, Quebec, and Ontario for quite some time now (our Prime Minister's personal physician runs a private clinic).

    Oh, and vision, dental, certain forms of chemo (that one was a shocker), perscription meds, and all sorts of other health care goodies aren't covered under the Canadian Health act either.

    Hopefully the next generation of Canadian politicians can deal honestly with our Health Care woes, the current generation doesn't appear up to the task. Except that new coke-head from Quebec..

  172. Not an amnesty by alienmole · · Score: 1

    Bush's plan isn't amnesty, it's a pragmatic "we need cheap labor so we may as well legalize it". What he's really proposing is, essentially, to give work visas to people who already have jobs here. The only reason he uses the term "amnesty" is to con the Democrats/liberals and aliens themselves into going along with the plan.

  173. $100,000 a year? by alienmole · · Score: 1
    "should we ban anybody who makes more than $100,000/year from running for political office? (Hell, yes/hell yes)"
    If you're an adult without disabilities living in the United States, and you're making less than $100,000/year, you aren't competent to run for political office. All it takes to make over $100,000 in the US is half a brain and a bit of a work ethic. How do you think that limiting your politicians to people who aren't capable of achieving even the most basic personal economic success is going to help the country?
  174. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  175. mod up the AC by poptones · · Score: 1

    Someone gets it...

  176. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by Troed · · Score: 1

    But then the bastard popped up on Al-Jazera speaking of current events.

    No. Please cite a referense.

    Further: The only dangerous country killing thousands of civilians that I know of as a threat is one under fascist control. The United States of America.

  177. Deaf ears by edunbar93 · · Score: 1

    The problem is that the US is a democracy. That means that (with some important exceptions) what the majority says, goes.

    What you propose is equivalent to a gay man in Kansas changing what the public thinks of him. Not only does the public not want to listen, but they've declared him an enemy of the people. If they had their way, they'd have him tarred and feathered (figuratively or not). That's why gays all live in the city where they have at least some modicum of acceptance.

    --
    "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
  178. Re:Terrorists don't mind cold by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

    I realize his actual name isn't even written in our alphabet, but the entire English-speaking population of the western world calls him Osama, so why not use it for the acronym?

    --
    "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  179. CIRUS is not CANDU by hr+raattgift · · Score: 1
    Not to mention that Canada is the only major industrialized nation in the world to have ever given a country the direct capability to build nuclear weapons (i.e. India's use of a CANDU nuclear reactor to breed spontaneously fissile material for a bomb in 1974).


    CIRUS, the Indian reactor in quesiton, was based on the NRX design. While it's a heavy-water-moderated/light-water-cooled design, it significantly predates CANDU. The latter is geared towards use in a nuclear power plant; NRX is geared towards materials testing, isotope production, and physics research. It is not especially better than any other research reactor at breeding isotopes -- it just that it trades off a need for (expensive) reactor grade heavy water against ordinary industrial production of the core. Other designs typically need a much much hotter and/or highly pressurized core, requiring heavy industrial processes which are harder and much more expensive.

    Although the overall design was very similar NRX, and the C in CIRUS is for Canada, the "US" is there for a reason: the U.S. government provided the financing and the reactor grade heavy water to the project.

    Certainly NRX, like many early reactor designes, can be coaxed into breeding weapons materials. There are even some aspects that make it easier, notably the on-line-adjustable pile and the facilities for irradiating test materials.

    From a legal perspective, NRX wasn't covered by nonproliferation rules or under IAEA safeguards, mostly because most of those did not exist at the time of the sale of the relevant designs and components. Both C & US stipulated or had contract terms requiring that CIRUS be used only for peaceful purposes. India violated these terms, and both of the other parties cut off nuclear research ties for decades as a result.

    breed spontaneously fissile material for a bomb


    Breeding, yes... they needed a source of neutrons to bombard 238U. A 238U atom occasionally captures a neutron, becomes 239U, which decays into 239Np which decays into 239Pu.

    238U much more readily captures a fast neutron than a slow one. Fast neutrons are emitted by Uranium fission. A moderator turns a fast neutron into a slow one. NRX, since it uses nearly pure heavy water as a neutron moderator, supplied slow neutrons efficiently. There are much more efficient designs if the goal is to produce lots of fast neutrons in order to breed plutonium from 238U, rather than lots of slow neutrons in order to sustain a uranium fission chain reaction.

    In 1960, when the reactor was first turned on, the idea of using CIRUS as the basis of a nuclear weapons program was possibly genuinely surprising. I honestly don't know. However, it did take 14 years to go from activation of CIRUS to India's first nuclear weapons test. However in retrospect, with today's knowledge, the proliferation risk would be obvious.

    spontaneously fissile material


    The important quality of nuclear weapons material is not that it is spontaneously fissile, but rather that a small mass of it compressed into a small volume of space can sustain a highly energetic nuclear chain reaction.

  180. Re:Lengths? What Lengths? by cybpunks3 · · Score: 1

    Democrat Gray Davis and the Democratic state legislature ruined California's economy.

  181. Re:Lengths? What Lengths? by winwar · · Score: 1

    "No, the #1 reason public schools in CA are crap is because 80% of the school budget goes for ADMINISTRATION. Only 20% goes to pay teachers, supply classrooms, and keep facilities in good repair."

    Umm, I think you reversed those numbers. The largest operating largest cost in any school district is salaries. And the largest number of salaried bodies tends to be teachers.....

    Oh, gee, here is something useful "The average spent on administration in California districts is about 7.3 percent." (http://www.sen.ca.gov/sor/policy/education/prop22 3.htm)

    But, hey, don't let facts get in the way of your opinion :)

  182. Re:No philosophy degree required by Hosiah · · Score: 1
    I'm pretty sure that no one was lambasting you

    vs not even a majority of people were lambasting you.

    I wish you were here in person so I could spit in your face. I always do that to lying weasels.

  183. Re:TORONTO has SMOG every day dumbass by Hosiah · · Score: 1
    Don't tell me about smog in Toronto. I've been to LA. If you set everything on fire at once in Toronto, it wouldn't make as much smog.

    Counting the seconds to Monday...when all the four-day-weekenders return to slavery and we can have Slashdot back.

  184. Re:What a vortex of confusion by Catbeller · · Score: 1

    I am playing the "wait 'til it tanks -- then you buy" game. But, I'm not wealthy, and any misjudgements I make may well ruin me when I swoop in to buy, vulture-like. Billionaires never starve, but I soon may. Also, buying cheap is an easy game, if you're wealthy, because up or down, you're fine. Inevitably, the market will go up, the real estate prices will grow again, no matter if it takes 1 year or 20. If you're mega-wealthy, you take losses, wait it out, and eventually you will make enormous profit.

    But guess what -- while the wealthy play the waiting game, sitting on stocks and depressed properties, waiting for the ships to come in, the job market will collapse, poverty will escalate, health insurance will evaporate, and purchase of consumer goods will plummet. It's called a depression. Spending on property and stocks don't create jobs, don't bring the country out of a death spiral. As a matter of fact, the worse it gets, the better for the 3 percent or so who will own everything worth owning. Wages depress, insurance is a joke, rents go WAAAAY up as the housing market bounces former buyers into rental spaces -- it's a damned Willy Wonka scenario for those holding liquid capital as the bubble bursts.

  185. like the taste of the Kool-Aid? by alizard · · Score: 1

    Nope. Here are the fastest growing ocupations in the US over the past 10 years:
    Health aides 138%
    Human service workers 136%
    Personal and home care aids 130%

    in other words, jobs that pay either minimum wage or just above minimum wage... about what burger flipping does. (if you have more current info on what burger flipping pays based on personal experience, feel free to respond)

    Enjoy your fantasy world while it lasts, the slow-motion trainwreck America is headed for will last you for the rest of your life. Hint: that fantasy world is based on cheap oil... I take it you belong to the Intelligent Design, oops, I mean the "abiotic" school of "thought" on the origin of oil as well.

  186. Re:Lengths? What Lengths? by Reziac · · Score: 1

    [snork] I think you're probably right :D

    I just had a disturbing thought comparing "puppies and ice cream for all" to a stockyard, where you get all you can eat for free... until they haul you away to become hamburger.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  187. Re:No philosophy degree required by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

    None is less than half. My wording may be contentious, but at least I'm not pretending to be the victim of a vast right wing eLynchMob that doesn't exist.

  188. One at a time, then... by Chemical+Serenity · · Score: 1

    - GDP is a pointless number to base anything on. It counts all the cash that moves around, regardless of whether that cash is spent doing anything productive. You could dig a $1 million dollar hole, then spend another $1 million filling it, and that would increase your GDP by $2 million. Try using purchase price parity or something less... random. Moreover, GDP has basically no effect on the population whatsoever. Median household income is far more pertinent, and currently median household income in Canada (~$56k CAD/year) is around 9% higher than that of the US (~$44k USD/year, or around ~$51k CAD).

    - Average total taxation is out of date. The tax situation has changed pretty substantially both north and south of the border since 1998 (for example, exemptions are now indexed to CPI in Canada, dividend income is nontaxable up to 25k, etc). I would love to see an up-to-date version.

    - Unemployment rates are calculated completely differently between the US and Canada. Add the 'discouraged' rates to current US unemployment rates, and take into account the difference in labour force utilization (canada routinely has a couple % higher utilization, mostly due to people magically disappearing from US labour force when they don't fall under the specific categories that allows them to be considered employable). Sadly, neither country tracks underemployed people, but I suppose it's a difficult measure to gauge.

    - Violent crime statistics in the US are calculated differently than those in Canada. In the US, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, violent crime in the US is comprised of "The number of persons arrested for homicide, forcible rape, robbery or aggravated assault as reported by law enforcement agencies to the FBI." Notice that there is no mention of basic assaults (ie. bar fights) that ARE included in the canadian statistics you provided, and which account for the vast vast majority of incidents reported. However, an apples-to-apples comparison is here. In summary: Violent crime in canada is substantially less, whereas property crime is essentially parallel.

    If comparisons MUST be made, at the very least they should be intellectually honest.

    --
    "People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
  189. Re:Rubbish by Chemical+Serenity · · Score: 1

    6 months to 2 years? Hardly. I'd be hard pressed to think of any gadget that took longer to get to Canada than the US by any stretch longer than perhaps 2 weeks. When I bought my Canon S-40, I got it in a store here before it was available in the US (Carsand-Mosher has got the hookups!) The device itself was not more expensive than the US version after taking into account exchange (in fact, it was about $10 cheaper... and local bought). GST was added, but that's hardly the 25% premium after 2 year wait you're trying to push.

    Considering places like California have between 7.75%-8.75% state sales tax randomly based on a county-by-county basis, GST seems pretty straightforward. For the consumer, anyways.

    Gas is more expensive. Not much, but some. During the big gas price spike, there was roughly a 10%-15% difference between the average price in Canada and the US (that was the time I was paying attention to it. I dunno what the difference is at the moment).

    As for median incomes, your numbers are way off. The median household income in the US is currently around $44kUSD (~$51kCAD). The median household income in Canada is currently ~$56kCAD (~$48kUSD) and the median household income in vancouver, as of the 2000 Canada Census is ~$77k. Moreover, the downtowns of Vancouver and Toronto are currently in a speculatory bubble environment, not unlike that of Miami, LA, et al. You can get 2000+ sq.ft out in the burbs (maple ridge, for instance) at $100-$200sq ft.

    Yeesh, so much intellectual dishonesty. Are you so afraid of an apples-to-apples comparison that you have to be deliberately misleading?

    --
    "People will pay big bucks for the luxury of ignorance."
  190. land ownership by TomDLux · · Score: 1

    The US lets you deduct the interest portion of your mortgage payments.

    In Canada, your principal residence has no captial gains. With a married couple, you can make that apply to home AND cottage.

    The US system is more inviting in the short term, more immediate consequences; the Canadian benefit comes much later, or to the heirs.

  191. Not If I Have To Stop Shaving My Arms by icbkr · · Score: 1

    Not sure of the rules up North, but I think handguns are frowned upon. I like my personal defense too much to give it up. Same reason I won't live in Jersey.

  192. foreign policy = troll? by truffle · · Score: 1


    This thread is pretty long so I'm only reading +5 comments, but I'm surprised to see nothing about international policy.

    As a Canadian skilled tech worker the major negative thing I see about living/working in the U.S. is foreign policy, including IRAQ. Some people prefer to live in a country that doesn't interfere as much with the affairs of others.

    So did everyone who mentioned IRAQ or Afghanistan get modded down as a troll?

    --

    ---
    I support spreading santorum
  193. Re:Don't forget the important part! by jim_deane · · Score: 1
    Hah, the US government doesn't want its citizens to renounce their citizenship before moving abroad because then it would lose the ability to doubly tax their foreign earned income.


    It is reprehensible that my (previous) informative post was modded flamebait. I link directly to the state department, after all.

    Well, at least my first flamebait post wasn't wasted on something useless.

    The United States will have no serious problem with the taxation issues. You see, since some citizens were using renunciation as a tax evasion tool, the U.S. Government now retains the power to tax your earnings for something like the ten years prior to, and the ten years following, the renunciation of citizenship. What they really want to avoid is someone waking up with a hangover saying "I renounced what now?"

    So, it isn't a big problem as far as the .Gov is concerned.

    Jim
  194. Re:Some numbers to compare Canada and USA by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

    A few months ago, I woke up in the middle of the night with terrible stomach pains. Thought it was gas, walked it off after a few hours.

    Couple nights later, same thing, only ten times worse. I let my wife talk me into going to hospital.

    Got there at 4 AM, was in a bed and had an IV going by 4:10, was Xrayed at 6 AM, Ultrasounded at 8 AM, and diagnosed with terrible gall stones by 10 AM. Surgery was scheduled for about 11 days later, with a tip of not to eat fat in the meantime, and come back to emergency if I had another attack.

    11 days later, I show at the hospital for my laproscopic gall bladder removal at 8:30, I'm on a gurney at 10:30, and I'm in recovery at 11:30. I'm being picked up by my wife at 3:30 that afternoon, and I'm home by four.

    Total cost, out of pocket, to me? Four bucks parking, times two. 50 or 60 bucks for a perscription of Tylenol-3.

    I remember thinking something like 'Wow. If I was American, this would potentially actually be a decision for me to make; get the surgery, go in debt? Or try to live with a blocked gall bladder, and hope it doesn't get worse?'

    This is relatively small-town Canada; the town is around 10,000 people, and the hospital also covers some smaller towns and municipalities around the area.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  195. Re:Some numbers to compare Canada and USA by emagery · · Score: 1

    wow... that's completely different from what I've heard and read from others. But even so, given your description, I don't mind being wrong!

  196. But will they hire ANYONE? by RamblerRandy · · Score: 1

    Will they hire someone without a degree? Who kept working for companies that went out of business? Who hasn't worked in the field in 10 years? Who is over 45 in age? Who has mental illness? Who is desperate to work? You know your desperate for employees when you hire someone like that! THE guy who put in his resume: "I specialize in working for companies going out of business" (yep, I did!)

    --
    I'll think of a really good SIG just before I die.
  197. Yes and no. by jd · · Score: 1
    • It can always borrow against the State, then recoup through taxes, so it doesn't need the money in advance. A private hospital can't do that.
    • A public health system is not an isolated component, but a part of the country as a whole. Thus, people who get sick aren't earning. So, in such a system, hospitals really always cost more (overall) than they earn. The idea is to cost the least, by getting people healthy. The healthier the nation, the more money is earned in total, so the more profitable the healthcare system becomes.
    • A private healthcare system earns nothing when people are working, but earns everything when people are sick, so has no incentive to either prevent illness, to treat it quickly, or to remedy the fault completely. A hospital maximizes profit only if cures require continued treatment. This is why they opposed, vigorously - almost violently - the discovery that peptic ulcers are caused by bacteria. That was a BIG money-spinner for them.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    1. Re:Yes and no. by birge · · Score: 1

      Hmm. Those were very good points, especially the last one.

    2. Re:Yes and no. by Geoff-with-a-G · · Score: 1

      The latter two are excellent points, but I take issue with the first:

      It can always borrow against the State, then recoup through taxes, so it doesn't need the money in advance. A private hospital can't do that.

      Sure it can. Private companies that are useful but currently losing money can borrow money and repay later when their profits improve. It happens all the time.

  198. Re:How about giving up the Socialism, eh? by Rayonic · · Score: 1

    60,000 is pretty huge for a nation-wide survey, especially since it's done monthly. Most surveys you see in the news (presidential approval ratings, for example) are 1,000 to 2,000 people big.

  199. Yep, I moved to Canada... by FrenchyinCT · · Score: 1

    I moved to Toronto in late April from Connecticut. I was serious when I said I'd do it.

    Got in under the skilled worker program. When people ask why I either answer "Better beer," if I'm tired of answering the question, or "Midlife crisis - had to get out of CT, and besides, I didn't like what was happening politically in the U.S." And it's true - when the Pod People (brainwashed Bush voters) gave the whole Abu Ghraib/torture scandal thing a free pass, I knew it was over for the US. The country's in decline and I want to get off the train wreck before it inevitably crashes.

    I love it here, in case anyone's interested. It's not perfect, and the taxes are higher, but not as bad as the Pod People would have you believe. And at least my tax money's paying for my social safety net, rather than someone else's f**king illegal war.

    And yes, I got a job fairly quickly - I was working again in less than three months. However, I will state it's easier for Americans than other immigrants. And I did get lucky - Canadians have a bias towards "Canadian experience" which means you might have to do volunteer work for awhile (yes, that means for free) before anyone will take you seriously. I was fortunate in that the company that pulled my resume off Workopolis needed someone with American experience as well.

    I'm happy I made the move. I ditched my car, BTW, and now go to work by bus and travel around Toronto on the subway. It's a bit more inconvenient but I have a LOT more money at the end of the month and that compensates very well for the inconvience, thankyouverymuch.

    Canada ROCKS, mes amis!!!

  200. Re:What a vortex of confusion by crucini · · Score: 1
    But, I'm not wealthy, and any misjudgements I make may well ruin me when I swoop in to buy, vulture-like...Also, buying cheap is an easy game, if you're wealthy, because up or down, you're fine...

    You seem to be saying that you've hit on a great way to make money, but it only works for billionaires. However, if you can turn 1 billion into 1.1 billion in the stock market, I think you can turn 10k into 11k with the same risk level. You seem to think that richer investors can afford more risk. That's not true. I'm kind of groping for words to illustrate the fallacy here.

    Investment timeframe and size of investment are two orthogonal concepts. If you are 20 years old and saving for retirement, you invest in something that offers the right tradeoff of risk and long term gain over 40 years. But if you're planning to buy a house in 4 years, and just don't want your money sitting idle, you buy assets that are not likely to be in a dip four years from now. You will not get as good a risk/reward package as the long term investor. This logic applies whether you have 10k to invest or 10 billion.

    Now, the concept that time will always rescue a bad investment is not true. A smart investor, big or small, will cut his losses rather than ride a bad investment all the way down. Have you ever looked at the "double down" system used by some gamblers? At first it sounds unbeatable - every time you lose, you double your bet. Eventually you must win, and N - (N/2 + N/4 + ...) = 1. When you actually simulate it, you find that you can lose your entire stake by running out of money. Which might make you think that billionaires could always win. But it turns out that whatever size bet you start with, you're trading an X% chance of losing your entire stake for an X% gain if you don't lose.
    ...while the wealthy play the waiting game, sitting on stocks and depressed properties, waiting for the ships to come in, the job market will collapse ...

    According to your earlier scenario, the wealthy are out of the market right now, but will buy heavily after a crash. Well, after a crash, buying heavily helps reinvigorate the market. After a crash, you hope there's someone who will buy heavily. So, a crash could hurt the job market, but the only help for the job market is investors having confidence and buying back in. So if you must imagine a gloomy scenario, say rather that the wealthy are heavily invested now, and will dump everything in a crash, causing the economy to bottom out.

    Now here's the other doom and gloom scenario: you keep your money in the mattress, waiting for the crash that never comes, while the economy roars past you. The billionaires become multibillionaires because they follow basic investment advice, the kind that's in hundreds of books.
  201. Jesus by ClioCJS · · Score: 1
    Looking at everything in percentages unfortunately doesn't cover every concept.

    A billionairre can lose 99% of his assets and still be a multi-millionairre. More importantly, he can still survive and provide anything his family and friends might need.

    A middle-class person can lose just 20% of his assets, and that might be enough to send them on a downward spiral resulting in bankruptcy and homelessness. If a middle-class person lost 99% of their assets, they probably would not be able to cover their base expenses for the next month. The rich guy would still be able to afford his health care after losing 99% of his assets.

    The rich can afford to invest a higher percentage of their money with a lower risk to their survival. You seem to think a billionairre investing 10% of his money is the same thing as someone with $200K net work investing 10% of their money. It's not the same situation and that is a gross oversimplification. One that makes me think you are a Republican, but I'm just guessing. It is indeed easier to make more money if you have more money. Even if you take percentages into account!

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
  202. obligatory Penny-Arcade by Geoff-with-a-G · · Score: 1