Sometimes I think it'd been better if Europeans had adopted native methods and cultures.
I agree. But even today many belive might makes right. It was even worse then.
Sometimes I think it'd been better if Europeans had adopted native methods and cultures.
But there's a flaw in your argument there. If we're talking about French, English, and the indigenous languages, which ones among them are more foreign?
Just look at StatsCan for 2006; in Nunavut, about 8% of the population speaks neither English nor French. Now correct me if I'm wrong here, but is there a Chinatown anywhere in Nunavut that I don't know about? As far as I know, Nunavut is not a major immigration hub in Canada.
Now as for English and French in Montreal, again, which one should jobs and other economic resources be available in? Again, are we talking about immigrants here?In Canada, only aobut 15% of the population speaks both English and French. So this clearly has nohting ot do with immigrants.
I agree. But even today many belive might makes right. It was even worse then.
Though I will concur on the whole noble savage ideal. It's not something I find all that unappealing, the real old ways that is.It's got nothing to do with might makes right. It has to do with advanced vs non advanced. I know there are those that glamorize the existence of native cultures. There are also people that have the Disney view of nature. It does not make it right.
Ummm, Cannuck, I'm going to take that as a mis-communication and at worst, perhaps just a little of you may not be aware of.The native population in North America were barely more advanced then cave men and for all intents and purposes there is no aboriginals that would want to go back to that way of life. After all, there is very little stopping them.
Ummm, Cannuck, I'm going to take that as a mis-communication and at worst, perhaps just a little of you may not be aware of.
Cannuck, this is usually when I take people apart, but I like you so I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt.It wasn't a mis-communication and I am aware of what aboriginals had accomplished 500 years ago. The comment still stands. They had not developed much beyond cave men, especially when compared to Europeans.
Being April, the tax month, my fringe political idea is that there must be a better way for a citizen to pay his dues to society than the current method.
Russia went from an impoverished country in 1989 to a rich almost super power by imposing fair and equal tax on all its citizens.
The system of taxation we have in Canada surely has earned its author(s) a very special place in Hell.
Somewhere below mass murderers and pedophiles.
But above abortion "doctors".
I have no intention or desire to hijack this thread, as I've been accused of doing elsewhere.
So, I am kind of cautious about expanding my suggestion of flat tax as a fringe political idea.
Actually, I would like flat tax combined with a consumption tax to replace ALL the existing taxes, municipal, provincial and federal.
A combination of a reasonable flat tax along with consumption tax would be only UNFAIR to those freeloaders who don't pay any taxes now, nor do they have any intention to any taxes EVER.
Personally I'd rather a resource tax over a consumption tax. After all, why should food be taxed? Non-renewable resources, on the other hand, are resources we intend to preserve and so such a tax would help to discourage their consumption too. This way they could kill two birds with one stone, bringing in revenue while preserving resources.
Another advantage with a resource tax is that it doesn't tax work, especially in a recession. For example, while it might be reasonable to tax steel, taxing cars is a diferent matter, since then we're taxing not just the steel but the labour put into buiding the car too. We might want to preserve resources, but we don't want to discourae work either. Besides, with gas, steel, and other resources being taxed, the car factory wold have paid enough tax already in the resources it purchases for the construction process without having to add an additional tax on the car itself.
I agree, but obviously the majority don't. Last summer here in B.C. a carbon tax (which is revenue neutral) was placed on gasoline purchases and periodically we get cheques back in the mail. Well 8 months later the screaming has just settled back to a dull roar. I'm happy with it and have since traded in a vehicle for one that is more fuel efficient. So big deal I pay a couple of cents a litre more and buy about 2/3 as many litres and get cheques to boot. Who in their right mind can complain about that?