I wasn’t referring to our select tariffs I was referring to the orange baboon being allowed to, by Canada’s lack of response, give relief to certain industries where a tariff would hurt the U.S… If we let him pick and choose without making all his constituents feel the pinch I think we’re giving him an easy win. Now I’m not entirely against Canada doing selective retaliation against mostly red states but I question the whole approach to tariffs at all. My preference would be for Canada to add an export tax. Appease trump by saying yeh, you’re right, we’ve been totally unfair to you (or something like that), so we’re going to tax all our exports to level the playing field. Then Canada keeps the money and trump can’t raise money through this approach to trade. Now I don’t discount that he would still have tariffs and so this would be a double hit to Canadian exports, but I’m curious how this would play out.

The title was a bit confusing. I think your point is that it should also be taught at parochial schools. There is no doubt this is the case. The thing that gets me is that is comes down to what public (or private to some extent) educations goal should be. I think that schools should teach all topics as it is important to expose kids to all aspects of life and let their passions lead them to a satisfying path. Others think that parents should have more control in restricting what topics are covered. I think there is a way to honour both approaches but there is conflict in its organization.

I’m against child quotas but for education on what exactly population growth and shrinkage entails. Let people understand what the implications and solutions are for the various scenarios of the future. Ultimately I see a profound lack of hope for our futures is leading young people to not want to bring a child into the world older generations have built. I am with them 100%. A solution I have introduced in previous discussions is a suicide pill that any elderly that can no longer be supported by society could take to avoid and painful and lonely death. That has not gone over well, lol.

Why is Canada letting dipshit pick and choose which industries he protects for political reasons. Canada should switch from the tariff method and put an export tax on everything.

Thanks. I wasn’t aware of the specific mechanism in our trade agreements. No government should be compromising their right to make public policy.

deleted by creator

I’m not a bigot at all. I’m only questioning how practical mass immigration is in the modern age.

What will they do when violence begins in the west? Run away again?

I saw that but the article also listed many recent attacks that were the case.

Unfortunately and as with everything, the actions of a few cause a reaction that affects so many. The rise of the right has been driven primarily by immigration of people looking for the promise of democratic freedom and opportunity. These incidents are used to prevent this migration entirely.

Is this right? Should people have a right to migrate in hopes of a better life? Some you might identify as far left don’t feel boarders should exist at all. Others believe that borders should be sealed and only people who would benefit the society within should enter (sadly based on the colour of their skin as well). The obvious answer is that the best practice probably falls somewhere in the middle.

I have two takes on this. The first is that immigration should be ended as we are entering the end of our societies ability to support existing populations with food and shelter, due to climate change. The second is that regardless of circumstances, never flee your country if you don’t like what’s going on. Fight to change it, even if you have to die trying. That is what I plan to do.

I’m a lazy, not so bright contrarian who doesn’t know the details enough to have formed a sensible defense. What I do know is that I have a right to express my beliefs through my patronage and I’m currently being inhibited in that effort by the intentional obfuscation of the information I need.

I understand the many inputs that are involved but if you take the accounting side of things it would take nothing to identify a % for each country involved. The difficulty you suggest sounds more like a marketing complaint. Company’s have all been only to quick lately to demonstrate how convenient it is to change their packaging.

For years I’ve been thinking about forcing a change to the Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act mentioned here by issuing a charter challenge. My stance would be that not forcing company’s to list all countries of origin and the percentage of material and labour that they make up denies me the information I need to make an informed decision. I have a right to this information so that I can express my support for or against areas of influence that affect my life. Anybody think this would work?

By that logic what you post on the internet is you ISPs speech and should also be subject to their control. No that I support a “FUCKYOU” plate but the law has to be honest with it’s prejudice.

There is a lot to be said for the positives of an end to democracy. The electorate of Ontario shouldn’t be trusted with these important decisions. This has been true since I started paying attention in the 90’s (so not party relevent). I regret not taking a different path in life to kick ass and chew bubble gum.

Like any word, use it too often for political efficacy and you will inevitably get arguments. It’s all too stupid. It takes the act of killing one person for any reason and conflates it into a competition as to who has suffered the most. Words are unimportant. Actions speak.