The "Bible Belts" in Canuckville
- Thread starter AnnaG
- Start date
Quite so, JLM. You're right on the money, literally. Governments in general tend to keep piling on more laws and programs - and all their corresponding one-time and ongoing costs - without any examination as to how they could cut down on the existing costs in order to afford the newest priorities.
A weird but accurate comparison would be this: A normal householder decides it's time to trade in the family car. So, he/she goes out and buys a new one, but doesn't bother to trade in the old one. A couple of years later, they decided to do it again, and once more, they buy the new car without trading in the old one. Now you would have 3 vehicles in the driveway, with perhaps 2 of them not being used, or more expensively, all 3 of them being used now and again with all the corresponding insurance & operating costs. And of course, there is the issue of taking up space too. A normal householder wouldn't do that of course, because they don't generally have a "bottomless pit" of money with which to draw from.
If you apply that comparison to how a government operates, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that there may be a pile of efficiencies lurking there, waiting to be cleaned up. There is nobody standing by to question a government on this when a new program or piece of legislation is proposed. Again, it's just "piled on" the existing lineup and it continues to grow, without any type of needs/benefit analysis. That's is one of the reasons we end up with more and bigger government involvement, and the resulting tax burden that doesn't ever seem to get sustainably smaller. It is indeed unrestricted growth, because "we" asked for it.
Eventually, something has to give and then we go through the unnecessary step of...let's see...downloading a chunk of health care costs to the provinces from the federal government and declaring how the "beast was slain." That in itself is idiocy and flim-flam because all those federal taxpayers are also provincial taxpayers...the bills have to get paid somehow.
If more effective spending and program controls were in place and applied in a logical way on an ongoing basis, none of these silly cost-cutting antics would be necessary in the first place.
Quite so. Thanks for catching that Anna. :lol:
What I meant to say was that this type of thinking on efficient spending practises would likely be widely accepted in our Bible Belts, particularly those found in rural, agricultural areas of the country. Religious farmers have a penchant for understanding belts - ammo belts, Sunday-go-to-meetin' belts, the occasional belt of medicinal dandelion wine, and the big belt that runs from the tractor PTO to the grain crusher. All this expertise in belts results in an intimate understanding of costs/benefits in various applications.
Thus, it is easy to draw a parallel between Bible Belts and support of wise and frugal government spending. :lol::lol::lol:
A beer drinker's take on taxes:lol:
Tax System explained in beer.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers?
How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings)
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $ 20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a Dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'
'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, this is how our tax system works.
The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction.
Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore.
In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
Tax System explained in beer.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers?
How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings)
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $ 20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a Dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'
'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, this is how our tax system works.
The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction.
Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore.
In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
A bible belt like in the Southern US doesn't exist in Western Canada at all.
Theres a bunch of bible communities south of sudbury...
Back in the day a buddy and i were driving through one of them and smoking dubbies... My buddy asked me "why is everyone waving at us?", i said "wave back cause they know were not from here, just keep waving....
"
Back in the day a buddy and i were driving through one of them and smoking dubbies... My buddy asked me "why is everyone waving at us?", i said "wave back cause they know were not from here, just keep waving....
"
A lot of this crap goes on because ( as our resident sage pointed out) we commoners don't have the expertise to make decisions on complicated matters like this and truth be known the Gov't. doesn't have the expertise either.
That is absolutely priceless. I think they should change "beer" to "juice" and start teaching it in elementary school right now. Great piece!
Theres a bunch of bible communities south of sudbury...
Back in the day a buddy and i were driving through one of them and smoking dubbies... My buddy asked me "why is everyone waving at us?", i said "wave back cause they know were not from here, just keep waving....
Whaddaya talking about? The world ends at French River. There's nothing south of Sudbury ;-)
Do they form a belt?Theres a bunch of bible communities south of sudbury...
Back in the day a buddy and i were driving through one of them and smoking dubbies... My buddy asked me "why is everyone waving at us?", i said "wave back cause they know were not from here, just keep waving....
We do have a sort of an imaginary partition in SK and MB known as the "garlic curtain" which pretty much consists of the Assiniboine watershed.
YouTube - Rick Mercer: The Kamsack Report
Haven't heard that one in years! But it does remind me of the "Bible Belt" which is located in southern Manitoba...at least, that's what we used to call it. It begins pretty much directly south of Winnipeg and runs west, including some towns such as Gretna, Plum Coulee, Horndean, Altona, Winkler, and ending at Morden. Runs along and south of Hwy. 14, as I recall. All these communities have a rich Mennonite heritage. I'm not sure if it qualifies as a bonafide Bible Belt, but again, that's what we used to call it a number of years ago.
There is one thing about this thread that really bothers me and will probably keep me awake all night. Why are they always called "Bible belts"? A belt is long and skinny which I will concede would describe a settlement along a narrow river valley. But places like our prairies aren't like that, so I'm beginning to realize why there are no Bible Belts in Alberta, they are probably Bible Blocks.
I agree. The question is, how are you going to force Canadians to eat right and exercise? There are temptations all around us, there is cheap and delicious (if nutritionally disastrous) food available at McDonald’s and other places. You can’t ban McDonald’s in a free enterprise. For that matter, there are salads and other healthy foods available at McDonald’s, but how many people stick to burgers and French Fries (the French must feel insulted that Americans call that disgusting product French)?
If you cannot force people to eat right and exercise, the next best thing is to look after their health as best as we can. And that means taxation.
Now, part of health care expenses are being used to teach people to exercise and eat right. But you can’t force people to do these things.
Really, countryboy? Well, next time look up statistics in USA, compare Bible Belt and non Bible Belt states. Bible Belt states are in general poorer than non Bible Belt, don’t look after their poor as well as non Bible Belt states do and if anything, have higher murder rates that some of the non Bible Belt states which don’t have the death penalty.
But why USA, let us compare The Bible Belt, Alberta and that den of wickedness, that Spawn of the Devil, Ontario, right here in Canada.
Crime in Canada - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Per 100,000 population
Ontario, Alberta
Criminal Code offenses, 5689, 9523
Crimes of violence, 756, 1101
Homicide , 1.5 , 2.8
Attempted murder, 2.5, 2.3
Assaults (level 1 to 3) , 563 , 888
Sexual assault , 56, 64
Robbery, 87, 93
Property crimes, 2811, 4480
You will find a whole variety crimes listed, they are all higher in Alberta than in Ontario.
Bible Belt? You can have it, I will take the den of iniquity, the den of wickedness, the Spawn of the Devil any day.
Indeed, this is what 'wise and frugal' spending can do for you.
Indeed, that is what my son was worried about when he was applying for residencies. In addition to several places in Ontario, he also went to Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Calgary for interviews. He was worried that he may be matched to one of those places and he may end up living in a high crime area.
When they do resident matching, they don’t give you any choice. You interview with the medical programs and rank them (and of course, medical programs rank you). Then the matching program finds the best match and gives it to you. You either take it or leave it, there is no other choice. So if he had been matched somewhere in the West, he would have to take it, he would have no choice in the matter.
He was relieved when he was assigned to London, Ontario (at Western).
Incidentally, he also went to St. John’s (Memorial University) for interview. He was stuck there for two days due to a snow storm, at a time when Ontario was bone dry. He was quite pi**ed off about it, he told me that he ranked Memorial University the last.
When they do resident matching, they don’t give you any choice. You interview with the medical programs and rank them (and of course, medical programs rank you). Then the matching program finds the best match and gives it to you. You either take it or leave it, there is no other choice. So if he had been matched somewhere in the West, he would have to take it, he would have no choice in the matter.
He was relieved when he was assigned to London, Ontario (at Western).
Incidentally, he also went to St. John’s (Memorial University) for interview. He was stuck there for two days due to a snow storm, at a time when Ontario was bone dry. He was quite pi**ed off about it, he told me that he ranked Memorial University the last.
I think you've missed his point. Or perhaps I've missed yours. While there are numerous hutterite colonies and a fair number of mennonites in southern Alberta, they are rather insular communities, not proselytizing at all and really don't interact much with outsiders. Other than some peculiarities of dress and appearance they are not very notable. I have no knowledge of the amish so won't speak to that.
Having spent the last three winters in southeast Texas, I can tell you unequivocably that that is not the case there. It never failed to amaze me how so many people "wore their heart on their sleeve" so to speak. It was quite common to be asked what church I went to "up there", to be asked what my personal relationship with Jesus was, to be invited to attend church services - and to be looked at askance when I declined or answered in the negative. Very aggressive, almost recruiting. Numerous radio and TV stations devoted to the cause, again, very aggressive. Baptists and Methodists are the denominations that come to mind, but I'm sure there were others. Coming from what you term Canada's bible belt, I'd never seen anything like it. Most Albertans I know would be considered dangerously agnostic or atheistic by south Texas standards.
Btw, have you ever been here? Just asking.
There's something amusing about the child of such a 'tolerant' 'liberal' person, who doesn't want to go somewhere because there might be scary people there, and who gets upset when the weather strands him for two days in the friendliest, most welcoming, wonderful party city in the country.
I laughed until I stopped, as they say.
I laughed until I stopped, as they say.
"Force?" OK, Adolf.
Taking a more moderate, tolerant, and humane approach, how about educating, encouraging, and supporting the move toward better nutrition? Of course, you'd have to detach yourself for a minute from your totalitarian approach to all things human, but you might be surprised what can get done by individuals - even just the lowly "normal and common people" - when you show them better alternatives and help them achieve them.
Your comment, "If you cannot force people to eat right and exercise, the next best thing is to look after their health as best as we can. And that means taxation" is about what I'd expect...as usual, short-sightedness combined with the old "let's throw some money at it" approach to a problem.