# Relations via 9/11



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> Though not an American, I will not forget 9/11 as a tragedy, not just for my neighbour, but for the whole world.  We were there with you then, we will still remember now.
> 
> I was at university attending my morning classes when I heard of the events.  The rest of my day's classes were cancelled.  It was surreal at the university, quiet, almost as if it had happened in my home town.  Then the airplanes began landing at our airports.  I passed by the airport and saw our tarmack covered with US bound planes and dozens of buses taking passengers to nearby hotels, hostels and private homes.  For one day, normal life had stopped.
> 
> Lest we forget the tragedies of mankind.



yet 60% percent of canadian teens or whatever think america is evil.  Do you ever work to dispel this insane notion in those you encounter, or do you just go along with the groupthink?


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> yet 60% percent of canadian teens or whatever think america is evil.  Do you ever work to dispel this insane notion in those you encounter, or do you just go along with the groupthink?



I'm not going to argue your perception of my country on a thread devoted to the memory of 9/11.  That's in bad taste.  

However, if you don't believe Canada wasn't outraged on 9/11 then perhaps you should read some of the headlines the days after in our newsprint, or look up how many Canadians gave blood for sources destined for down south, our how much we donated to the families, or how many families and businesses donated their houses and rooms to American passengers stranded up in Canada.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> I'm not going to argue your perception of my country on a thread devoted to the memory of 9/11.  That's in bad taste.
> 
> However, if you don't believe Canada wasn't outraged on 9/11 then perhaps you should read some of the headlines the days after in our newsprint, or look up how many Canadians gave blood for sources destined for down south, our how much we donated to the families, or how many families and businesses donated their houses and rooms to American passengers stranded up in Canada.



I know you saw the poll from a couple days ago.  It's not just my perception. Your insincerity is in bad taste.


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> I know you saw the poll from a couple days ago.  It's not just my perception. Your insincerity is in bad taste.



So let me get this straight, you believe I wish ill on the United States and am glad for 9/11?  You also believe my kinsmen believe the same thing?


----------



## Avatar4321

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> I know you saw the poll from a couple days ago.  It's not just my perception. Your insincerity is in bad taste.



this isnt the place for this.


----------



## Annie

Avatar4321 said:
			
		

> this isnt the place for this.



I agree, gonna split and move to Canada forum.


----------



## Annie

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> So let me get this straight, you believe I wish ill on the United States and am glad for 9/11?  You also believe my kinsmen believe the same thing?



Issac, I'm with Evil, it's part of the reason I chose to split this thread. You are good people! So are nearly every Canadian I've come in contact with, with the exception of Mr Marbles, who is a self-proclaimed socialist/communist, all have been remarkably open minded, even when disagreeing. Mr Marbles is always polite, even if I never agree with him. Most harsh criticism for dumb things said by your officials has come from Canadians-which of course brings you to nearly American standard of bashing politicians!


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Avatar4321 said:
			
		

> this isnt the place for this.




I asked him if he argued when canadians say america is evil.  If he does not, he's part of the problem.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> So let me get this straight, you believe I wish ill on the United States and am glad for 9/11?  You also believe my kinsmen believe the same thing?




 I never said that.  If you listen to "AMerica is evil"  clap trap, and do not argue, then you could be a better friend to us.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Sir Evil said:
			
		

> It was a mods decision so it will stay put.  Why get after Isaac on this one? that was a truly respectful post that he made



I asked him  if he argued with the antiamerican crap which abounds in his country.  He got defensive.  I feel a true friend would be on our side more than one day a year.  Is that so insane?  Yeah sure.  I'm an awful person now.


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> I never said that.  If you listen to "AMerica is evil"  clap trap, and do not argue, then you could be a better friend to us.



I do not think America is evil by any means.  They are my neighbour and closest ally.  I don't agree with a lot in the US, but that should not be surprising.  If our nations agreed with absolutely everything, than we should and would be the same nation.

I've seen the poll that says Canadian teenagers think the US is evil, but those are teenagers.  A vast majority of teenagers are always against whoever they perceive "the man" to be.  If you came to Canada, I think you might be surprised how the average American is perceived and received.  Furthermore, I think you might be very surprised how Canadians feel about 9/11.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> I do not think America is evil by any means.  They are my neighbour and closest ally.  I don't agree with a lot in the US, but that should not be surprising.  If our nations agreed with absolutely everything, than we should and would be the same nation.
> 
> I've seen the poll that says Canadian teenagers think the US is evil, but those are teenagers.  A vast majority of teenagers are always against whoever they perceive "the man" to be.  If you came to Canada, I think you might be surprised how the average American is perceived and received.  Furthermore, I think you might be very surprised how Canadians feel about 9/11.



Sorry Isaac, to throw your kind words back in your face like that.  That was a little uncool.

Where do you see the main disagreements?  Socialism vs. capitalism?  Stopping nuclear proliferation in the hands of terrorists vs. allowing it to get worse?


----------



## MrMarbles

9/11 was a horrible event. But unfortunatley it is one in a long line of horrible events. Canada was/is on the side of America when it comes to the war on terror, and bringing those to justice that commited this one such act.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> 9/11 was a horrible event. But unfortunatley it is one in a long line of horrible events. Canada was/is on the side of America when it comes to the war on terror, and bringing those to justice that commited this one such act.



How about when it comes to perpetuating unfounded antiamerican propaganda?  

America evil?  You sit there and spew that crap and then want to be "on our side".  It's insincere.


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> Sorry Isaac, to throw your kind words back in your face like that.  That was a little uncool.
> 
> Where do you see the main disagreements?  Socialism vs. capitalism?  Stopping nuclear proliferation in the hands of terrorists vs. allowing it to get worse?



Apology accepted.

Disagreements?

Universal Healthcare is something very close to the Canadian psyche and it works and is important that it is universal.  It is not perfect and I do not pretend it is.  Nor do I pretend that it would be necessarily feasable in the US.  It does however have some main advanatages:
- Remote/Arctic towns would not have the economic climates necessary to provide user pay systems
- Given the reduced income discrepency between rich and poor compared with the United States it is more economical on a per capita basis to provide healthcare as a social program.  For proof, see past threads in which I provided a few independant reports.  Canadians pay less per capita for socialized healthcare than the US.

Cultural assimilation is very different between the US and Canada for both ethical and historical reasons.  Canada's cultural diversity was a matter of straight immigration.  The US's cultural basis also included slavery and Mexican migrants.  As such Canada's diversity is spread more evenly because more immigrants came from more countries and we're much more geographically spread than that in the US, where ex-slave and migrant states have huge pockets of immigrants of a given ethnicity.  Since Canada's cultural minorities were more spread out, the concept of multiculturalism in regards to a more liberalized stance on education, faith, language, etc was much easier and necessary for Canada to bear and why it is possible for two official languages.

Post WW2, to the end of the Cold War, Canada and the US had essentially identical foreign policies.  With the end of the cold war, the lack of a new superpower has changed the world political climate.  US is the sole superpower, and its foreign policy is geared towards maintaining its influence around the world and ensuring the stability of US institutions both at home and abroad.  Canada does not have the world influence and as such, the same pressures or needs.  It is indeed this reason why Canada introduced the concept of Peacekeepers in the 1950's.  It wasn't exactly a completely alturistic motive.  Canada cannot project force in the world, but it could project its values in populations through Peacekeeping.  Whether we have been entirely successful is certainly open for debate, but the values are the same.

Until the War in Iraq, the policies were essentially one of the same through values were perhaps different.  The US saw the War on Iraq as an extension of the War or Terror.  The case was simply not made to the international community on either that connection or the connection to weapons of mass destruction.  

In addition, there is a disagreement on how to wage the war or terror ties into the previously mentionned Canadian foreign policy.  Without going to deep into debate on how to wage the war on terrorism, the skinny is that the US believes the best method is to use force to root out the terrorists unconventional forces.  The prevailing Canadian sentiment is that Terrorism cannot be fought with force alone due to unconventional element of the Terrorists.  

The main line the government is portraying is to eliminate known terrorists by conventional forces, but also attempt to remove the underlying social factors that breed terrorists.  Unfortunately this is all hot air, because Canada has neither the ability nor the means to provide the resources or influence necessary to carry out its strategy.  Canada wished the international community focussed on the re-building of Afghanistan to make Afghanistan a successful model of westernization of a failed terrorist state.  

Other disagreements include Kyoto protocol, environmental management, social policy and energy management.  Though they may seem like many, the similarities far outweigh the differences.  Canada is a democratic, capitalistic state with equality and fundamental human rights for every citizen, just like the United States


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Typical harmful lib socialist policies.

The conditions that cause terrorism?  What are those.


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> Typical harmful lib socialist policies.



Why?



> The conditions that cause terrorism?  What are those.



Poverty, social inequity, popularity of religious fundamentalism and hopelessness.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> Why?


Quality of care suffers.  People must accept whatever the government gives them with no recourse.    Free markets keep prices lower, and quality higher.  This is econ 101.  I believe the U.S. should let market forces into it's healthcare more by retraining individuals to not see health care as an entitlement and to pay for it on their own, like we're willing to do with new cars.  I believe that healthcare alternatives for the poor WOULD spring up at lower price points.    You're going in exactly the wrong direction.



> Poverty, social inequity, popularity of religious fundamentalism and hopelessness.



How about despotic tyrannical governments who purposefully create jihadist armies to use as a wedge against the west?  do you see these as a factor?  Have you been reading the threads about the quaran and what it says about jews and christians?  Just wondering.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

And another thing.  America is the most  truly multicultural nation on earth.    What you mean by "multiculturalism" is institutionalized white/christian guilt.  

Aren't there laws against NON french signs and non french radio in some areas of canada?  That's fascist, dude.


----------



## Annie

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> Apology accepted.
> 
> Disagreements?
> 
> Universal Healthcare is something very close to the Canadian psyche and it works and is important that it is universal.  It is not perfect and I do not pretend it is.  Nor do I pretend that it would be necessarily feasable in the US.  It does however have some main advanatages:
> - Remote/Arctic towns would not have the economic climates necessary to provide user pay systems
> - Given the reduced income discrepency between rich and poor compared with the United States it is more economical on a per capita basis to provide healthcare as a social program.  For proof, see past threads in which I provided a few independant reports.  Canadians pay less per capita for socialized healthcare than the US.


 Well dang it Issac, I tried to be nice then you had to go and get stupid.  :scratch: 

Prove to me that Canadians pay less for comperable treatment. I want to see that link! 



> Cultural assimilation is very different between the US and Canada for both ethical and historical reasons.  Canada's cultural diversity was a matter of straight immigration.  The US's cultural basis also included slavery and Mexican migrants.  As such Canada's diversity is spread more evenly because more immigrants came from more countries and we're much more geographically spread than that in the US, where ex-slave and migrant states have huge pockets of immigrants of a given ethnicity.  Since Canada's cultural minorities were more spread out, the concept of multiculturalism in regards to a more liberalized stance on education, faith, language, etc was much easier and necessary for Canada to bear and why it is possible for two official languages.


I'm too tired to dig at this, so it's a gimme. 



> Post WW2, to the end of the Cold War, Canada and the US had essentially identical foreign policies.  With the end of the cold war, the lack of a new superpower has changed the world political climate.  US is the sole superpower, and its foreign policy is geared towards maintaining its influence around the world and ensuring the stability of US institutions both at home and abroad.  Canada does not have the world influence and as such, the same pressures or needs.  It is indeed this reason why Canada introduced the concept of Peacekeepers in the 1950's.  It wasn't exactly a completely alturistic motive.  Canada cannot project force in the world, but it could project its values in populations through Peacekeeping.  Whether we have been entirely successful is certainly open for debate, but the values are the same.
> 
> Until the War in Iraq, the policies were essentially one of the same through values were perhaps different.  The US saw the War on Iraq as an extension of the War or Terror.  The case was simply not made to the international community on either that connection or the connection to weapons of mass destruction.
> 
> In addition, there is a disagreement on how to wage the war or terror ties into the previously mentionned Canadian foreign policy.  Without going to deep into debate on how to wage the war on terrorism, the skinny is that the US believes the best method is to use force to root out the terrorists unconventional forces.  The prevailing Canadian sentiment is that Terrorism cannot be fought with force alone due to unconventional element of the Terrorists.
> 
> The main line the government is portraying is to eliminate known terrorists by conventional forces, but also attempt to remove the underlying social factors that breed terrorists.  Unfortunately this is all hot air, because Canada has neither the ability nor the means to provide the resources or influence necessary to carry out its strategy.  Canada wished the international community focussed on the re-building of Afghanistan to make Afghanistan a successful model of westernization of a failed terrorist state.
> 
> Other disagreements include Kyoto protocol, environmental management, social policy and energy management.  Though they may seem like many, the similarities far outweigh the differences.  Canada is a democratic, capitalistic state with equality and fundamental human rights for every citizen, just like the United States



Looked for a break in the 'thinking', couldn't find it.


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> Quality of care suffers.  People must accept whatever the government gives them with no recourse.    Free markets keep prices lower, and quality higher.  This is econ 101.  I believe the U.S. should let market forces into it's healthcare more by retraining individuals to not see health care as an entitlement and to pay for it on their own, like we're willing to do with new cars.  I believe that healthcare alternatives for the poor WOULD spring up at lower price points.    You're going in exactly the wrong direction.


Usually i would completely agree with you, but not in terms of health care apparently.  My proof is on a previous thread:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9355
Post #17



> How about despotic tyrannical governments who purposefully create jihadist armies to use as a wedge against the west?  do you see these as a factor?  Have you been reading the threads about the quaran and what it says about jews and christians?  Just wondering.



I believe I specifically mentionned religious fundamentalism.   You could topple a thousands governments, but if you do not show a populace the err in their ways by providing a viable alternative to fundamentalist belief, the next tyranical despot will be right around the corner.


----------



## Isaac Brock

The link for medicine is provided in my subsequent post.  

Unfortunately, a simple link cannot describe the comparitive foreign policy for Canada and the US, though i will try to see if I can find something.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> Usually i would completely agree with you, but not in terms of health care apparently.  My proof is on a previous thread:
> http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9355
> Post #17


This is not PROOF.  I don't buy it.   The system will only degrade further, and comparing cost per capita to ours is not meaningful, as ours is a bit screwed up right now and is not market driven ENOUGH either.   The LIBERAL lawyers are driving costs through the roof with needless litigation, not by accident I believe.  It makes your percapita numbers look so nice.  Can lawyers sue the government for botched medical care in canada.  And like I said, U.S.  citizens are do not shop for care, we should.    MORE PRIVATIZATION IS THE ANSWER FOR US ALL.  Your left wing study by medical professionals seeking to avoid having to compete by entrenching themselves into the government apparatus is not compelling proof.


> I believe I specifically mentionned religious fundamentalism.   You could topple a thousands governments, but if you do not show a populace the err in their ways by providing a viable alternative to fundamentalist belief, the next tyranical despot will be right around the corner.



It's the leadership style of the leaders in islam.  Tyrannical, they do not value  the lives of their own citizens, and use them as weapons.  And economic potentials there are stunted for the average person as the tyant and his friends control all markets through force, kind of like in socialism.  I believe there is a place for moderated islam in the world.  DO you think religion in general needs to be eliminated from the world?  All religions or just islam?


----------



## Isaac Brock

1995 Canada Foreign Policy Review.  (Notes on projection of Canadian values through peacekeeping, basis for foreign policy decisions)
http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/foreign_policy/cnd-world/menu-en.asp

Canada - US Relations a study (Notes on historical evolution of multiculturalism in both countries, a general comparative study)
http://www.ola.bc.ca/online/cf/module-4/usrel.html#RTFToC11


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Your own words only Isaac.  Tell me where my model of things is wrong.

We can post links all day long.  Try thinking for yourself.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Projection of canadian values through peacekeeping?  Does that mean a steadfast refusal to make decisions?  Compromise at all times only leads nowhere.  Some worldviews are incompatible.


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> This is not PROOF.  I don't buy it.   The system will only degrade further, and comparing cost per capita to ours is not meaningful, as ours is a bit screwed up right now and is not market driven ENOUGH either.   The LIBERAL lawyers are driving costs through the roof with needless litigation, not by accident I believe.  It makes your percapita numbers look so nice.  Can lawyers sue the government for botched medical care in canada.  And like I said, U.S.  citizens are do not shop for care, we should.    MORE PRIVATIZATION IS THE ANSWER FOR US ALL.  Your left wing study by medical professionals seeking to avoid having to compete by entrenching themselves into the government apparatus is not compelling proof.



It is proof and it is independent, done by a professional agency not under any governmental jurisdiction.  Lawyers can sue the government for botched medical care.  Medical care as a service has a much greater overhead than most services, this is why centrilization for this particular service made economic sense.  When seperate insurance boards, hospitals, review agencies, technical advisory boards, etc are necessary for each company, it makes in very difficult to be competitive with a centrilizaed system.  It would venture a guess it would be very similar with education, police, and fire services.  



> It's the leadership style of the leaders in islam.  Tyrannical, they do not value  the lives of their own citizens, and use them as weapons.  And economic potentials there are stunted for the average person as the tyant and his friends control all markets through force, kind of like in socialism.  I believe there is a place for moderated islam in the world.  DO you think religion in general needs to be eliminated from the world?  All religions or just islam?



I think any religion has the possibility to be manipulated any way one pleases.  Religion is not inherintly bad, but the way people interpret it, can certainly be.  Tyrants exploit this fact.  How can solely removing the tyrant or the terrorist alone acheive this goal?  Fear?  Perhaps, but in their ethos they have nothing to lose.  If you have nothign to lose, you have nothing to fear.  How do you deal with zealots that have no fear?


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> Your own words only Isaac.  Tell me where my model of things is wrong.
> 
> We can post links all day long.  Try thinking for yourself.



Kathianne asked me for links, I obliged.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> Kathianne asked me for links, I obliged.



That's fine.  They do not satisfy me.  Nor must they.  I would like you to tell me where I am wrong.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> It is proof and it is independent, done by a professional agency not under any governmental jurisdiction.  Lawyers can sue the government for botched medical care.  Medical care as a service has a much greater overhead than most services, this is why centrilization for this particular service made economic sense.  When seperate insurance boards, hospitals, review agencies, technical advisory boards, etc are necessary for each company, it makes in very difficult to be competitive with a centrilizaed system.  It would venture a guess it would be very similar with education, police, and fire services.


It is not proof.  For the reasons I cited, the study is bogus.


> I think any religion has the possibility to be manipulated any way one pleases.  Religion is not inherintly bad, but the way people interpret it, can certainly be.  Tyrants exploit this fact.  How can solely removing the tyrant or the terrorist alone acheive this goal?  Fear?  Perhaps, but in their ethos they have nothing to lose.  If you have nothign to lose, you have nothing to fear.  How do you deal with zealots that have no fear?



Kill them.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Why are people coming to america when things are really serious?  And what will happen when our system is as bad as yours?  And when there is no profit to be had in healthcare, where will innovation come from?


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> Projection of canadian values through peacekeeping?  Does that mean a steadfast refusal to make decisions?  Compromise at all times only leads nowhere.  Some worldviews are incompatible.



Correct.  Projecting Canadian values through peacekeeping was the policy.  As I stated before, the results were decidely mixed.  On one hand there is generally positive view of Canada worldwise as a result of multilateralism and peacekeeping.  

Where Canada failed in its policy was assuming it had the military capacity to undertake the number of missions it had set forth to accomplish.    Successes did occur in the former Yugoslavia, Cyprus, East Timor, Cambodia, Paupa New Guinea and other missions.  Where your point has merit is that Canada did fail in deciding how many endeavours it had a capacity for.  As such, failures such as Rwanda happened.  In addition, the spreading out of the troops often meant that Canada's role was in support or in co-command of other nations which reduced the influence it was able to provide abroad.  

The foreign policy shift after 1995 when the last major review occurred saw the switch between many small missions to a few large missions.  Point and case, in the 1970's Canada undertook 24 UN peacekeeping missions.  Currently Canada is involved in 3 missions: Kosovo, Afghanistan and Golan Heights.

Given the anemic nature of the Canadian Military and given the future instabilities likely abraod, I suspect in next year's foreign policy review, the military will be revamped to reduce its conventional capacity and increase its peacekeeping and special-op capacity.


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> It is not proof.  For the reasons I cited, the study is bogus.



Your reasons to do not dispel the proof despite your insistance of liberal bias, which is not the case.



> Kill them.



...and the cat came back the very next day.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> Correct.  Projecting Canadian values through peacekeeping was the policy.  As I stated before, the results were decidely mixed.  On one hand there is generally positive view of Canada worldwise as a result of multilateralism and peacekeeping.


Yes. Well illogical liberalism is spreading.  Did you see the horrid states of france and germany from the other day?


> Where Canada failed in its policy was assuming it had the military capacity to undertake the number of missions it had set forth to accomplish.    Successes did occur in the former Yugoslavia, Cyprus, East Timor, Cambodia, Paupa New Guinea and other missions.  Where your point has merit is that Canada did fail in deciding how many endeavours it had a capacity for.  As such, failures such as Rwanda happened.  In addition, the spreading out of the troops often meant that Canada's role was in support or in co-command of other nations which reduced the influence it was able to provide abroad.
> 
> The foreign policy shift after 1995 when the last major review occurred saw the switch between many small missions to a few large missions.  Point and case, in the 1970's Canada undertook 24 UN peacekeeping missions.  Currently Canada is involved in 3 missions: Kosovo, Afghanistan and Golan Heights.
> 
> Given the anemic nature of the Canadian Military and given the future instabilities likely abraod, I suspect in next year's foreign policy review, the military will be revamped to reduce its conventional capacity and increase its peacekeeping and special-op capacity.



You need to abadon extreme collectivism and get a set of values.  Capitalist values.  Get on board with America.  Project capitalism around the globe with us.  A rising tide raises all ships.  Wealth creation is NOT A zero sum game. The fear of expanding humanity is environmentalist wacko propaganda, or else it's old world powers fearing the future and what it will bring.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> Your reasons to do not dispel the proof despite your insistance of liberal bias, which is not the case.


You're comparing it to a system being gamed by lawyers and which is also not dependant on free choice to the extent it should be.  Both systems are screwed up in their own unique ways.  The solution to both is privatization and deregulation and putting choice back into the consumers hand and not the insurance companies.  And tort reform.


> ...and the cat came back the very next day.



cat?


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> Why are people coming to america when things are really serious?  And what will happen when our system is as bad as yours?  And when there is no profit to be had in healthcare, where will innovation come from?



I didn't say your system was bad, it most likely quite good compared other nations.  Universal healthcare most likely won't suit the United States for reasons I stated before, but it does work up here.  Canada's system is very good too and that's why people are coming to Canada as well.  As long as the demand for doctors is high the price to students will become doctors.  Drug and medical supply are still private in Canada, innovation will still occur in Canada's medical private sector which is seperate from our public Medicare sector.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> I didn't say your system was bad, it most likely quite good compared other nations.  Universal healthcare most likely won't suit the United States for reasons I stated before, but it does work up here.  Canada's system is very good too and that's why people are coming to Canada as well.  As long as the demand for doctors is high the price to students will become doctors.  Drug and medical supply are still private in Canada, innovation will still occur in Canada's medical private sector which is seperate from our public Medicare sector.



Ours IS a little screwed up from lawyers, and people feeling entitled, locking themselves into a huge corporate monstrousity and losing choice.


WHY DO MANY CANADIANS COME HERE FOR HEALTH CARE THEN!


----------



## Isaac Brock

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> You're comparing it to a system being gamed by lawyers and which is also not dependant on free choice to the extent it should be.  Both systems are screwed up in their own unique ways.  The solution to both is privatization and deregulation and putting choice back into the consumers hand and not the insurance companies.  And tort reform.



Our system is played by lawyers as well much to the chagrin of taxpayers.  We have large private and class action against hospitals as well.  I cannot comment to a perfectly private system, because it doesn't exist.  Why do you believe that it does not exist as such?  I can only compare current US and Canadian systems, which I believe was the point of my answer to your question.




> cat?


The Cat Came Back, a popular folk-kids song by Harry Miller.  The jist of the poem/song is that the owner does all he can to rid himself of a cat, be in spite of his actions, the cat always comes back.  My point is that if you only solve terrorism and removing tyrants by killing alone, that it is akin to fixing a leaking faucet by continually mopping up the spill.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> Our system is played by lawyers as well much to the chagrin of taxpayers.  We have large private and class action against hospitals as well.  I cannot comment to a perfectly private system, because it doesn't exist.  Why do you believe that it does not exist as such?  I can only compare current US and Canadian systems, which I believe was the point of my answer to your question.
> 
> 
> 
> The Cat Came Back, a popular folk-kids song by Harry Miller.  The jist of the poem/song is that the owner does all he can to rid himself of a cat, be in spite of his actions, the cat always comes back.  My point is that if you only solve terrorism and removing tyrants by killing alone, that it is akin to fixing a leaking faucet by continually mopping up the spill.




So why does anyone come here Isaac, when your system is superior?

Over time it will get worse and worse. The government will give you less and less, and you will have to accept.  THIS IS WHAT ALWAYS HAPPENS IN A MONOPOLY, AND STATE MONOPOLIES ARE THE WORST.  econ 101.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Also Isaac, people have a right to their beliefs, fundamentalist or otherwise.  That should always be permissible.  IT's when they start ACTING murederous that they need to be dealt with.  What you're discussing sounds like suppression of free thought.  One way to deal with fundamentalism is to relieve them of their oppressive tyrants who do not allow moderate points of view in the media THEY CONTROL.  Freedom solves all problems.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

Isaac Brock said:
			
		

> The Cat Came Back, a popular folk-kids song by Harry Miller.  The jist of the poem/song is that the owner does all he can to rid himself of a cat, be in spite of his actions, the cat always comes back.  My point is that if you only solve terrorism and removing tyrants by killing alone, that it is akin to fixing a leaking faucet by continually mopping up the spill.



We're changing the form of government in Iraq.  Have you been watching the news?


----------



## MrMarbles

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> We're changing the form of government in Iraq.  Have you been watching the news?



I've been watching the news, uprisings, riots, rebellions, dead soldiers, a puppet gov't, oh ya, i've been watching.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> I've been watching the news, uprisings, riots, rebellions, dead soldiers, a puppet gov't, oh ya, i've been watching.



Pay attention to the conversation, dip.  Isaac implied all we're doing is changing tyrants.  That's not the case,  we're changing the form of government in the society this time.


We have an agenda of freedom, contrary to your agenda of world communist totalitarianism.


----------



## MrMarbles

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> Pay attention to the conversation, dip.  Isaac implied all we're doing is changing tyrants.  That's not the case,  we're changing the form of government in the society this time.
> 
> 
> We have an agenda of freedom, contrary to your agenda of world communist totalitarianism.



Ok they are free now. Bye..... Wait, why aren't you leaving. You've liberated them, and now you are still there against their wishes. Bye,  bye. 

If they are free, let them control their own oil and economy, there own form of gov't. If they all hated the rule of Saddam and the way things where, they now have a chance to do things right for themselves. Let them choose there gov't, and control their own destinys.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> Ok they are free now. Bye..... Wait, why aren't you leaving. You've liberated them, and now you are still there against their wishes. Bye,  bye.
> 
> If they are free, let them control their own oil and economy, there own form of gov't. If they all hated the rule of Saddam and the way things where, they now have a chance to do things right for themselves. Let them choose there gov't, and control their own destinys.



Ummmm, thats's what we're doing, asscracker.  Forcing democracy gives everyone a vote, hence rulers will not rise up due to thuggishness alone.


----------



## MrMarbles

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> Ummmm, thats's what we're doing, asscracker.  Forcing democracy gives everyone a vote, hence rulers will not rise up due to thuggishness alone.



Oh okay. Another great spin off of forced democracy is allowing yourselves of huge cut of Iraqi interets. I hope Haliburton paid alot of money for they're own president, you know these things shouldn't come cheaply.


----------



## dilloduck

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> Oh okay. Another great spin off of forced democracy is allowing yourselves of huge cut of Iraqi interets. I hope Haliburton paid alot of money for they're own president, you know these things shouldn't come cheaply.



What other company can do what Haliburton is doing for a better price?


----------



## rtwngAvngr

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> Oh okay. Another great spin off of forced democracy is allowing yourselves of huge cut of Iraqi interets. I hope Haliburton paid alot of money for they're own president, you know these things shouldn't come cheaply.



"But what's the name of the guy on second?"

" Halliburton."


----------



## Said1

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> Oh okay. Another great spin off of forced democracy is allowing yourselves of huge cut of Iraqi interets. I hope Haliburton paid alot of money for they're own president, you know these things shouldn't come cheaply.



Wouldn't that be something the WTO needs to keep an eye on. Bidding on Iraqi reconstruction projects in not limited to US contractors. If something fishy was going on, the WTO needs to do their job and investigate IF anyone had a legitimate complaint that was brought to their attention right?


----------



## MrMarbles

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> "But what's the name of the guy on second?"
> 
> " Halliburton."



I'm pretty sure What is one second. Haliburton just runs the ball park, and the city, state, and white house.


----------



## Avatar4321

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure What is one second. Haliburton just runs the ball park, and the city, state, and white house.



You know its always funny to see you NeoComs try to pretend your all for freedom and Humanitarian efforts and then get upset when we free a nation or prevent people from being slaughtered in killing fields. 

But i forgot its because of our evil corporations who provide jobs and goods and services to millions of people. Its all there fault.


----------



## NightTrain

Avatar4321 said:
			
		

> You know its always funny to see you NeoComs -snip-




LOL

I just love that term.  NeoComs.


----------



## MrMarbles

I get it, Neo-communist, ha! It's funny because it is just like Neo-conservative, but it means something completely different. So funny, so original!

When you wage war and kill people to increase your bottom line, then i have a problem with it.


----------



## Said1

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> I get it, Neo-communist, ha! It's funny because it is just like Neo-conservative, but it means something completely different. So funny, so original!
> 
> When you wage war and kill people to increase your bottom line, then i have a problem with it.



Take a deep breath, and go read the articles I posted about Canada and Finland.


----------



## NightTrain

hmm... who pissed in his cheerios?


----------



## Said1

NightTrain said:
			
		

> hmm... who pissed in his cheerios?




I guess it was so funny he forgot to laugh.  Sorry Marbles, I couldn't help myself. Don't bother, I'll do it for you.


----------



## MrMarbles

I was just making a joke, and responding to Avatar.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> I was just making a joke, and responding to Avatar.



Yep,  just being your usual good natured  self!


----------



## MrMarbles

rtwngAvngr said:
			
		

> Yep,  just being your usual good natured  self!




'Cause you know everyone here are just little angels.


----------



## rtwngAvngr

MrMarbles said:
			
		

> 'Cause you know everyone here are just little angels.



:halo:


----------

