Terry;
Maybe, the Canadian Government should invite some East Germans to come over!
They can rebuild almost anything and keep it function for centuries! Samo
for Cubans! No need for business or industry, the greedy, mean people who
make societies work!
Sorry to see the state of your country.
"Terry Pearson" <rtpt_2000@no-spam> wrote in message
news:F6qKa.310987$Vi5.8176949@no-spam
> The world economic freedom report has Canada slipping from
> number 8 to number 13 in the area of economic freedom.
>
> Argentina is number ten
>
> --
> Terry Pearson
> The philosophy of socialism equates to
> poverty thinking. The rich get rich and
> the poor get poor. They both planned it
> that way.
> http://www.rightpoint.ca
>
> The Daily Blog
> http://www.rightpoint.ca/blog.htm
> The Deilly Point
> http://www.rightpoint.ca/deilly.htm
> "vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
> > Erik Trammel <trammel@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:<3EF99FCC.90109@no-spam>...
> > > After WW II Canada was the world's fourth largest economy
> > > and enjoyed the world's second highest standard of living
> > > next to the U.S. But Canada has since fallen badly because of
misguided
> > > economic policies. This is the opinion of Tim Hearn, the CEO
> > > of Canada's large energy company Imperial Oil.
> > >
> > > Mr. Hearn believes that the latest damaging policy decision for Canada
> > > was the signing on to the prohibitively expensive Kyoto Accord,
> > > from which 80% of the world is exempt and which the U.S. has
> > > rejected as unfair and useless.
> > >
> > > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can be
> > > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis below:
> > >
> > >
>
http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D41-4AC2-8A00
> -98C615FE506D
> >
> > Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada as
> > having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree, which is
> > why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere politcally.
>
>
How can something be useless and at the same time be so effective as
to be deemed 'harmful'?
But this amazing leap of logic escapes Mr Tim Hearn., CEO of Imperial
Oil.
Is it time that Imperial find change for a Hearn?
Or could it be that the message got 'twisted' passing through such
stalwarts of truth as Terry Pearson, Diane Francis, and nshindede
Ed
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 14:05:24 GMT, <nshinede@no-spam> wrote:
>Terry;
>
>Maybe, the Canadian Government should invite some East Germans to come over!
>They can rebuild almost anything and keep it function for centuries! Samo
>for Cubans! No need for business or industry, the greedy, mean people who
>make societies work!
>
>Sorry to see the state of your country.
>"Terry Pearson" <rtpt_2000@no-spam> wrote in message
>news:F6qKa.310987$Vi5.8176949@no-spam
>> The world economic freedom report has Canada slipping from
>> number 8 to number 13 in the area of economic freedom.
>>
>> Argentina is number ten
>>
>> --
>> Terry Pearson
>> The philosophy of socialism equates to
>> poverty thinking. The rich get rich and
>> the poor get poor. They both planned it
>> that way.
>> http://www.rightpoint.ca
>>
>> The Daily Blog
>> http://www.rightpoint.ca/blog.htm
>> The Deilly Point
>> http://www.rightpoint.ca/deilly.htm
>> "vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
>> news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
>> > Erik Trammel <trammel@no-spam> wrote in message
>> news:<3EF99FCC.90109@no-spam>...
>> > > After WW II Canada was the world's fourth largest economy
>> > > and enjoyed the world's second highest standard of living
>> > > next to the U.S. But Canada has since fallen badly because of
>misguided
>> > > economic policies. This is the opinion of Tim Hearn, the CEO
>> > > of Canada's large energy company Imperial Oil.
>> > >
>> > > Mr. Hearn believes that the latest damaging policy decision for Canada
>> > > was the signing on to the prohibitively expensive Kyoto Accord,
>> > > from which 80% of the world is exempt and which the U.S. has
>> > > rejected as unfair and useless.
>> > >
>> > > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can be
>> > > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis below:
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D41-4AC2-8A00
>> -98C615FE506D
>> >
>> > Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada as
>> > having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree, which is
>> > why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere politcally.
>>
>>
>
I think ideology is trumping logic in this posts. If Argentina is a ten,
and Canada is a thirteen, then anyone with knowledage about these
two economies would consider a higher number to be better. It
would be difficult to argue that it is only because of a time lag that
Canada's ranking is not accurately reflected by its economic
performance.
I'm not in favour of unnecessary government intrusion (and we have
lots of it in Canada). It's just that the methodology to arrive at the
ranking
sounds very suspect and can discredit those trying to make the case
for more individual freedom.
Regards
Dan Parker
<nshinede@no-spam> wrote in message
news:E4DKa.4856$xv.3837@no-spam
> Terry;
>
> Maybe, the Canadian Government should invite some East Germans to come
over!
> They can rebuild almost anything and keep it function for centuries! Samo
> for Cubans! No need for business or industry, the greedy, mean people who
> make societies work!
>
> Sorry to see the state of your country.
> "Terry Pearson" <rtpt_2000@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:F6qKa.310987$Vi5.8176949@no-spam
> > The world economic freedom report has Canada slipping from
> > number 8 to number 13 in the area of economic freedom.
> >
> > Argentina is number ten
> >
> > --
> > Terry Pearson
> > The philosophy of socialism equates to
> > poverty thinking. The rich get rich and
> > the poor get poor. They both planned it
> > that way.
> > http://www.rightpoint.ca
> >
> > The Daily Blog
> > http://www.rightpoint.ca/blog.htm
> > The Deilly Point
> > http://www.rightpoint.ca/deilly.htm
> > "vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
> > news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
> > > Erik Trammel <trammel@no-spam> wrote in message
> > news:<3EF99FCC.90109@no-spam>...
> > > > After WW II Canada was the world's fourth largest economy
> > > > and enjoyed the world's second highest standard of living
> > > > next to the U.S. But Canada has since fallen badly because of
> misguided
> > > > economic policies. This is the opinion of Tim Hearn, the CEO
> > > > of Canada's large energy company Imperial Oil.
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Hearn believes that the latest damaging policy decision for
Canada
> > > > was the signing on to the prohibitively expensive Kyoto Accord,
> > > > from which 80% of the world is exempt and which the U.S. has
> > > > rejected as unfair and useless.
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can be
> > > > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis below:
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>
http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D41-4AC2-8A00
> > -98C615FE506D
> > >
> > > Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada as
> > > having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree, which is
> > > why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere politcally.
> >
> >
>
>
Dan, you sound like any guy that just lost the contest. Protest the logic
and the rules.
"Dan Parker" <micron9@no-spam> wrote in message
news:%EGKa.33292$Mc4.4888876@no-spam
> I think ideology is trumping logic in this posts. If Argentina is a ten,
> and Canada is a thirteen, then anyone with knowledage about these
> two economies would consider a higher number to be better. It
> would be difficult to argue that it is only because of a time lag that
> Canada's ranking is not accurately reflected by its economic
> performance.
>
> I'm not in favour of unnecessary government intrusion (and we have
> lots of it in Canada). It's just that the methodology to arrive at the
> ranking
> sounds very suspect and can discredit those trying to make the case
> for more individual freedom.
>
> Regards
> Dan Parker
> <nshinede@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:E4DKa.4856$xv.3837@no-spam
> > Terry;
> >
> > Maybe, the Canadian Government should invite some East Germans to come
> over!
> > They can rebuild almost anything and keep it function for centuries!
Samo
> > for Cubans! No need for business or industry, the greedy, mean people
who
> > make societies work!
> >
> > Sorry to see the state of your country.
> > "Terry Pearson" <rtpt_2000@no-spam> wrote in message
> > news:F6qKa.310987$Vi5.8176949@no-spam
> > > The world economic freedom report has Canada slipping from
> > > number 8 to number 13 in the area of economic freedom.
> > >
> > > Argentina is number ten
> > >
> > > --
> > > Terry Pearson
> > > The philosophy of socialism equates to
> > > poverty thinking. The rich get rich and
> > > the poor get poor. They both planned it
> > > that way.
> > > http://www.rightpoint.ca
> > >
> > > The Daily Blog
> > > http://www.rightpoint.ca/blog.htm
> > > The Deilly Point
> > > http://www.rightpoint.ca/deilly.htm
> > > "vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
> > > news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
> > > > Erik Trammel <trammel@no-spam> wrote in message
> > > news:<3EF99FCC.90109@no-spam>...
> > > > > After WW II Canada was the world's fourth largest economy
> > > > > and enjoyed the world's second highest standard of living
> > > > > next to the U.S. But Canada has since fallen badly because of
> > misguided
> > > > > economic policies. This is the opinion of Tim Hearn, the CEO
> > > > > of Canada's large energy company Imperial Oil.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mr. Hearn believes that the latest damaging policy decision for
> Canada
> > > > > was the signing on to the prohibitively expensive Kyoto Accord,
> > > > > from which 80% of the world is exempt and which the U.S. has
> > > > > rejected as unfair and useless.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can be
> > > > > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis below:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D41-4AC2-8A00
> > > -98C615FE506D
> > > >
> > > > Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada as
> > > > having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree, which
is
> > > > why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere
politcally.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Well, Eddie, I can't open your attachments, so I guess that something that
is "useless" can be "Harmful" if it defeats the purpose for which it was
intended, and disallows another solution in the meantime.
Simple logic.
"Eddie Rose" <Eddie@no-spam> wrote in message
news:5s0mfvov2advm2ba0nqn4ghh2qqbqiroeo@no-spam
> How can something be useless and at the same time be so effective as
> to be deemed 'harmful'?
> But this amazing leap of logic escapes Mr Tim Hearn., CEO of Imperial
> Oil.
> Is it time that Imperial find change for a Hearn?
> Or could it be that the message got 'twisted' passing through such
> stalwarts of truth as Terry Pearson, Diane Francis, and nshindede
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 14:05:24 GMT, <nshinede@no-spam> wrote:
>
> >Terry;
> >
> >Maybe, the Canadian Government should invite some East Germans to come
over!
> >They can rebuild almost anything and keep it function for centuries! Samo
> >for Cubans! No need for business or industry, the greedy, mean people who
> >make societies work!
> >
> >Sorry to see the state of your country.
> >"Terry Pearson" <rtpt_2000@no-spam> wrote in message
> >news:F6qKa.310987$Vi5.8176949@no-spam
> >> The world economic freedom report has Canada slipping from
> >> number 8 to number 13 in the area of economic freedom.
> >>
> >> Argentina is number ten
> >>
> >> --
> >> Terry Pearson
> >> The philosophy of socialism equates to
> >> poverty thinking. The rich get rich and
> >> the poor get poor. They both planned it
> >> that way.
> >> http://www.rightpoint.ca
> >>
> >> The Daily Blog
> >> http://www.rightpoint.ca/blog.htm
> >> The Deilly Point
> >> http://www.rightpoint.ca/deilly.htm
> >> "vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
> >> news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
> >> > Erik Trammel <trammel@no-spam> wrote in message
> >> news:<3EF99FCC.90109@no-spam>...
> >> > > After WW II Canada was the world's fourth largest economy
> >> > > and enjoyed the world's second highest standard of living
> >> > > next to the U.S. But Canada has since fallen badly because of
> >misguided
> >> > > economic policies. This is the opinion of Tim Hearn, the CEO
> >> > > of Canada's large energy company Imperial Oil.
> >> > >
> >> > > Mr. Hearn believes that the latest damaging policy decision for
Canada
> >> > > was the signing on to the prohibitively expensive Kyoto Accord,
> >> > > from which 80% of the world is exempt and which the U.S. has
> >> > > rejected as unfair and useless.
> >> > >
> >> > > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can be
> >> > > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis below:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >>
>
>http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D41-4AC2-8A0
0
> >> -98C615FE506D
> >> >
> >> > Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada as
> >> > having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree, which is
> >> > why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere
politcally.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
Mike; The point being made, I think, is that by standard economic
measurements, Canada is BELOW Argentina. Measured from 1 (Best)
Secondly, I'm unclear about your position.
If your stating that the "globalization" of economics is foolish, I agree.
"Mike Nagel" <mnagel1073@no-spam> wrote in message
news:3efbaff4.7818725@no-spam
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 18:08:59 GMT, "Dan Parker" <micron9@no-spam>
> wrote:
>
> >I think ideology is trumping logic in this posts. If Argentina is a ten,
> >and Canada is a thirteen, then anyone with knowledage about these
> >two economies would consider a higher number to be better. It
> >would be difficult to argue that it is only because of a time lag that
> >Canada's ranking is not accurately reflected by its economic
> >performance.
> >
> >I'm not in favour of unnecessary government intrusion (and we have
> >lots of it in Canada). It's just that the methodology to arrive at the
> >ranking
> >sounds very suspect and can discredit those trying to make the case
> >for more individual freedom.
> >
> >Regards
> >Dan Parker
>
>
>
> So what have we here? This "Economic Freedom" standard rates
> Argentina above Canada!?!?. What the Fuck is that? Freedom to starve?
> What a load of road apples.
>
> I have been in many many countries and anyone who tries to claim that
> Canada is not the best country on earth is too stupid to live.
>
> This "Ecomomic Freedom" thing is bogus. Designed to fool the stoops.
> Nothing else.
>
> Mike Nagel
"Terry Pearson" <rtpt_2000@no-spam> wrote in message
news:el5La.308899$ro6.7529977@no-spam
> If you go to the Frazer site they have the report on
> world economic freedom. They explain in great
> detail as to how they arrive at their conclusions.
Which shows you how much of a mashed-tatties-for-brains you are. The made-up
stats were compiled by the Heritage Foundation, not the Fraser Institute.
--
ian a. king / east vancouver, bc / ianking [at] shaw [dot] ca
more at http://vancouverscrum.blogspot.com
"vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
> > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can
be
> > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis
below:
> >
> >
http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D4
1-4AC2-8A00-98C615FE506D
>
> Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada
as
> having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree,
which is
> why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere
politcally.
No, the UN at one time rated Canada as the best place to live -
based on a variety of sometimes arbitrary criteria.
I believe we've fallen to third on that list. In purely economic
terms we were never number one, and have been slipping in most
references for some years. Our standard of living, our health
care system, our disposable income, child poverty, etc. etc. have
been falling behind others who have been rising, including the
US.
Any "statistics" or "studies" from the UN are about as valid as the same
from the Universities of California.
Statistics don't lie, but liars use statistics. Beware.
"Paul Moore" <moorepa#@no-spam> wrote in message
news:z2CLa.8542$a51.6612@no-spam
>
> "vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
>
> > > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can
> be
> > > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis
> below:
> > >
> > >
> http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D4
> 1-4AC2-8A00-98C615FE506D
> >
> > Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada
> as
> > having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree,
> which is
> > why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere
> politcally.
>
> No, the UN at one time rated Canada as the best place to live -
> based on a variety of sometimes arbitrary criteria.
> I believe we've fallen to third on that list. In purely economic
> terms we were never number one, and have been slipping in most
> references for some years. Our standard of living, our health
> care system, our disposable income, child poverty, etc. etc. have
> been falling behind others who have been rising, including the
> US.
>
>
>
On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:50:27 GMT, John Corman <jcorman@no-spam>
wrote:
>On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 13:43:59 GMT, "Paul Moore" <moorepa#@no-spam>
>wrote:
>>No, the UN at one time rated Canada as the best place to live -
>>based on a variety of sometimes arbitrary criteria.
>>I believe we've fallen to third on that list. In purely economic
>>terms we were never number one
>===================================================
>Are you certain of that? I thought Canada had the highest standard of
>living in the world BT (Before Trudeau)
>I recall us being neck and neck for number one with the Swedes in the
>late sixties.
>
>John Corman
You're right, we were...then. Now, we hold position number six in the
standard of living event, but appear to have a solid lead in best
place to live.
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 07:45:33 -0400, E. Barry Bruyea
<crested@no-spam> wrote:
>On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 14:50:27 GMT, John Corman <jcorman@no-spam>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 29 Jun 2003 13:43:59 GMT, "Paul Moore" <moorepa#@no-spam>
>>wrote:
>>>No, the UN at one time rated Canada as the best place to live -
>>>based on a variety of sometimes arbitrary criteria.
>>>I believe we've fallen to third on that list. In purely economic
>>>terms we were never number one
>>===================================================
>>Are you certain of that? I thought Canada had the highest standard of
>>living in the world BT (Before Trudeau)
>>I recall us being neck and neck for number one with the Swedes in the
>>late sixties.
>>
>>John Corman
>
>
>You're right, we were...then. Now, we hold position number six in the
>standard of living event, but appear to have a solid lead in best
>place to live.
========================================================
"The good ole days". Give an American a Canadian dollar for a one
dollar US purchase and get change back.
With respect to our "quality of life" rating, where do you think the
UN would rank us if we started going against the flow and had backed
the US and Britain against Saddam?
John Corman
The swedes were number one? How possibly dumb can you be? The country is
about bankrupt!
Statistics don't lie, but liars use "statistics"
and useful idiots believe them!
"Hartmann Schaffer" <hs@no-spam> wrote in message
news:3f00acc2@no-spam
> In article <pk80gv8iqpthgahgpk4tiu2hs4sj1d65mo@no-spam>,
> E. Barry Bruyea <crested@no-spam> writes:
> > ...
> >>Are you certain of that? I thought Canada had the highest standard of
> >>living in the world BT (Before Trudeau)
> >>I recall us being neck and neck for number one with the Swedes in the
> >>late sixties.
> >
> > You're right, we were...then. Now, we hold position number six in the
> > standard of living event,
>
> which measure of standard of living is used here? $/capita?
>
> > but appear to have a solid lead in best
> > place to live.
>
> actually, i think last year we slipped there by a position or two.
> not that it really matters (i never joined the "aren't we great" choir
> when we were #1): unfortunately what you see in the papers is the
> ranking, not the actual score, but i strongly suspect that the
> score difference among the top 5 ot 10 is miniscule
>
> hs
>
> --
>
> ceterum censeo SCO esse delendam
In article <VI7Ma.7190$xv.2763@no-spam>,
<nshinede@no-spam> writes:
> The swedes were number one?
where did i say that?
> How possibly dumb can you be?
???
kiddo, i suggested a while ago that you with your comments until you
learned
1. to read and understand
2. something about the subject you are trying to comment on
so far you are going ofer, and nothing you have shown so far gives us
any hope for improvement within the next 100 years. otoh, you might
actually be as old as you hint you are, in which case i would suggest
that you visit your family doctor and ask him for an alzheimer test
hs
--
ceterum censeo SCO esse delendam
I can think of no other large country I'd rather have
as a neighbour than the U.S., but that doesn't mean
I want to copy every last bit of their decor.
I checked one quick stat which is hard to fudge and
found the U.S. infant mortality rate was 6.67 per
1,000 in 2002, while Canada's was 4.95 . So this
questions the assertion made that the U.S. is superior
in health care.
http://www.bartleby.com/151/a28.html
I also know the U.S. is about tied for the highest
incarceration rate in the world (which is indicative
in more ways than one regarding the quality of life
in a country).
A google for 'current account deficit' would show
the U.S. to be in poor shape (which is causing the
Euro, Canadian Dollar etc. to rise in value against the
U.S. dollar) Additional pressure is being bought to
bear on the U.S. dollar, in that some countries are
working to switch to the Euro as the currency by
which oil transactions are denominated. (Countries
having to keep U.S dollars in reserve for oil purchases
is, in effect, a significant subsidy for the U.S. dollar.)
Yet the dynamics go far beyond this, in that
conventional economics is undergoing attacks on
its false doctrines that must, and should, eventually
prevail. For example, the founder of the the GNP
concept, Nobel Laureate Kuznets, cautioned that the
GNP (or GDP today) did not measure national well
being. GDP is essentially a calculator without a minus
key, so that the Exxon Valdez disaster, the Manitoba
flood etc. etc. etc.raised the GDPs of their respective
economies, because more money circulated. Yet tangible
wealth was lost and fiancial debt was increased.
Dan Parker
www.socialcredit.com
"Paul Moore" <moorepa#@no-spam> wrote in message
news:z2CLa.8542$a51.6612@no-spam
>
> "vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
>
> > > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can
> be
> > > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis
> below:
> > >
> > >
> http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D4
> 1-4AC2-8A00-98C615FE506D
> >
> > Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada
> as
> > having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree,
> which is
> > why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere
> politcally.
>
> No, the UN at one time rated Canada as the best place to live -
> based on a variety of sometimes arbitrary criteria.
> I believe we've fallen to third on that list. In purely economic
> terms we were never number one, and have been slipping in most
> references for some years. Our standard of living, our health
> care system, our disposable income, child poverty, etc. etc. have
> been falling behind others who have been rising, including the
> US.
>
>
>
Dan;
In my case, I'm just an old American, or should I more correctly say, US
Citizen, since we are both Americans, and I certainly appreciate your
honesty in your first paragraph.
We certainly don't have a "perfect" society. But then, neither the human
race, nor a single individual, is "perfect" in all eyes. We all have
opinions.
Our infant mortality rate? Very bad. But then we have open borders. We have
liberals who believe all "dope" should be legal, and addicts who have
babies. Our people overeat. They smoke too much. There are probably many
additional reasons, but I'll bet, mostly due to our rights to personal
freedoms. Our lives have individual choices. We (should be) held responsible
for them as individuals. It is not our government's duty to control our
lives.
Our "decor"? Well, yes, I usually perfer to stay at home. By my exit door,
is a sign, as the US Army at one time posted in Germany, which reads, in
several languages, "You are Leaving the American Sector." So yes, you see,
we are a nation of individuals. We disagree on almost everything.
Incarceration? But you see, real freedom, in the liberal sense, breeds much
irresponsibility. People become responsible for their actions.
It's a very fine, as well as a fuzzy line, between
personal responsibility, and our much announced "rights." Do these people
deserve incarceration? No. They earned it.
Then, of course, we always think of the ongoing murder of people in the old
Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and southeast asia, well over 100 million people
now and counting,
as opposed to the maybe 20 million murdered by Adolf Hitler. Adolf needs to
take lessons from these liberals, not so?
I think, with the hotel like services we provide for these criminals,
amounting, I think conservatively, on an average cost of $40 thousand per
year, is not too bad a living.
Our national debt? Yes. If we were the "imperialists" and "expansionists"
the liberals insist we are, why is the Internal Revenue Service of my
country knocking on my door, not yours:-)?? After all, I should be living on
the
tributes provided by all of our colonies!
The truth here is, we gave the world it's freedom, paid them for it, and
buried our honored military dead, cared for their families as best we could,
all at OUR expense. Are some of us resentful? Damned right, we are.
Oil? The economy? Dan, you and I both know, right now, as in 1945, we could
just take it.
If it were left to me, we would.
But we also both know we won't. We may, if not probably will go down. For
some reason, we as a nation think we must be "liked" by the entire world of
nuts.
But your world will not be the better for it if we do go down.
"Dan Parker" <micron9@no-spam> wrote in message
news:201Na.52323$Mc4.6583406@no-spam
> I can think of no other large country I'd rather have
> as a neighbour than the U.S., but that doesn't mean
> I want to copy every last bit of their decor.
>
> I checked one quick stat which is hard to fudge and
> found the U.S. infant mortality rate was 6.67 per
> 1,000 in 2002, while Canada's was 4.95 . So this
> questions the assertion made that the U.S. is superior
> in health care.
>
> http://www.bartleby.com/151/a28.html
>
> I also know the U.S. is about tied for the highest
> incarceration rate in the world (which is indicative
> in more ways than one regarding the quality of life
> in a country).
>
> A google for 'current account deficit' would show
> the U.S. to be in poor shape (which is causing the
> Euro, Canadian Dollar etc. to rise in value against the
> U.S. dollar) Additional pressure is being bought to
> bear on the U.S. dollar, in that some countries are
> working to switch to the Euro as the currency by
> which oil transactions are denominated. (Countries
> having to keep U.S dollars in reserve for oil purchases
> is, in effect, a significant subsidy for the U.S. dollar.)
>
> Yet the dynamics go far beyond this, in that
> conventional economics is undergoing attacks on
> its false doctrines that must, and should, eventually
> prevail. For example, the founder of the the GNP
> concept, Nobel Laureate Kuznets, cautioned that the
> GNP (or GDP today) did not measure national well
> being. GDP is essentially a calculator without a minus
> key, so that the Exxon Valdez disaster, the Manitoba
> flood etc. etc. etc.raised the GDPs of their respective
> economies, because more money circulated. Yet tangible
> wealth was lost and fiancial debt was increased.
>
> Dan Parker
> www.socialcredit.com
>
>
>
>
> "Paul Moore" <moorepa#@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:z2CLa.8542$a51.6612@no-spam
> >
> > "vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
> > news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
> >
> > > > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can
> > be
> > > > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis
> > below:
> > > >
> > > >
> > http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D4
> > 1-4AC2-8A00-98C615FE506D
> > >
> > > Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada
> > as
> > > having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree,
> > which is
> > > why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere
> > politcally.
> >
> > No, the UN at one time rated Canada as the best place to live -
> > based on a variety of sometimes arbitrary criteria.
> > I believe we've fallen to third on that list. In purely economic
> > terms we were never number one, and have been slipping in most
> > references for some years. Our standard of living, our health
> > care system, our disposable income, child poverty, etc. etc. have
> > been falling behind others who have been rising, including the
> > US.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
I think a flawed health care system is a major contributor to
the relatively high U.S. infant mortality rate (just as a flaws
in the health system leads to long waiting lists for some
Canadian medical procedures)
I also think that if it was the use of drugs that caused high
incarceration rates, the Netherlands would have one of the
highest crime and incarceration rates in the world.
And of course, all nations are nations of individuals.
However, like the comment on the falsity of economic doctrines
in my last post, there are again much larger issues that must
be addressed if one is not to become a dupe of those who
desire to take away individual rights (whether from the so-called
right or the so-called left).
The fact is, the U.S., like Canada, lost much of its sovereignty in
1913 (The Federal Reserve Act in the U.S., the Bank Act in
Canada).
http://landru.i-link-2.net/monques/
This is part of a move towards world government, which
I think is a source of both great danger and great opportunity.
The danger lies in the fact that there is a tendency for current
world bodies to be secretive and unaccountable. The death
tolls you quoted on other unaccountable societies shows one
of the dangers of this type of government.
A good link on this is at
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/welcome.html
Right now there is a movement towards more democracy
in governments, and consequently less overt violence
against individuals. However, at the same time, the method
of money creation is driving more and more individuals deeper
and deeper into debt, resulting in such things as a children
not having a parent at home during important formative years
(i.e. the debt imposes hidden costs, so that even though
North American families are working longer and harder, the
purchasing power of most workers is falling). Slave plantations
can be very peaceful, so it is not peace alone which is
important, but peace through justice.
Besides, any institution which enslaves individuals never stays peaceful
for long (in historical terms). Even if it is the type of slavery that
most individuals are currently unaware of.
The following link points to a new look at freedom and the
supremacy of the individual (under God).
http://www.globaljusticemovement.org/thirdway.htm
Regards
Dan Parker
<nshinede@no-spam> wrote in message
news:9bfOa.14755$xv.8735@no-spam
> Dan;
>
> In my case, I'm just an old American, or should I more correctly say, US
> Citizen, since we are both Americans, and I certainly appreciate your
> honesty in your first paragraph.
>
> We certainly don't have a "perfect" society. But then, neither the human
> race, nor a single individual, is "perfect" in all eyes. We all have
> opinions.
>
> Our infant mortality rate? Very bad. But then we have open borders. We
have
> liberals who believe all "dope" should be legal, and addicts who have
> babies. Our people overeat. They smoke too much. There are probably many
> additional reasons, but I'll bet, mostly due to our rights to personal
> freedoms. Our lives have individual choices. We (should be) held
responsible
> for them as individuals. It is not our government's duty to control our
> lives.
>
> Our "decor"? Well, yes, I usually perfer to stay at home. By my exit door,
> is a sign, as the US Army at one time posted in Germany, which reads, in
> several languages, "You are Leaving the American Sector." So yes, you
see,
> we are a nation of individuals. We disagree on almost everything.
>
> Incarceration? But you see, real freedom, in the liberal sense, breeds
much
> irresponsibility. People become responsible for their actions.
> It's a very fine, as well as a fuzzy line, between
> personal responsibility, and our much announced "rights." Do these people
> deserve incarceration? No. They earned it.
>
> Then, of course, we always think of the ongoing murder of people in the
old
> Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and southeast asia, well over 100 million
people
> now and counting,
> as opposed to the maybe 20 million murdered by Adolf Hitler. Adolf needs
to
> take lessons from these liberals, not so?
>
> I think, with the hotel like services we provide for these criminals,
> amounting, I think conservatively, on an average cost of $40 thousand per
> year, is not too bad a living.
>
> Our national debt? Yes. If we were the "imperialists" and "expansionists"
> the liberals insist we are, why is the Internal Revenue Service of my
> country knocking on my door, not yours:-)?? After all, I should be living
on
> the
> tributes provided by all of our colonies!
>
> The truth here is, we gave the world it's freedom, paid them for it, and
> buried our honored military dead, cared for their families as best we
could,
> all at OUR expense. Are some of us resentful? Damned right, we are.
>
> Oil? The economy? Dan, you and I both know, right now, as in 1945, we
could
> just take it.
> If it were left to me, we would.
>
> But we also both know we won't. We may, if not probably will go down. For
> some reason, we as a nation think we must be "liked" by the entire world
of
> nuts.
>
> But your world will not be the better for it if we do go down.
>
>
>
>
>
> "Dan Parker" <micron9@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:201Na.52323$Mc4.6583406@no-spam
> > I can think of no other large country I'd rather have
> > as a neighbour than the U.S., but that doesn't mean
> > I want to copy every last bit of their decor.
> >
> > I checked one quick stat which is hard to fudge and
> > found the U.S. infant mortality rate was 6.67 per
> > 1,000 in 2002, while Canada's was 4.95 . So this
> > questions the assertion made that the U.S. is superior
> > in health care.
> >
> > http://www.bartleby.com/151/a28.html
> >
> > I also know the U.S. is about tied for the highest
> > incarceration rate in the world (which is indicative
> > in more ways than one regarding the quality of life
> > in a country).
> >
> > A google for 'current account deficit' would show
> > the U.S. to be in poor shape (which is causing the
> > Euro, Canadian Dollar etc. to rise in value against the
> > U.S. dollar) Additional pressure is being bought to
> > bear on the U.S. dollar, in that some countries are
> > working to switch to the Euro as the currency by
> > which oil transactions are denominated. (Countries
> > having to keep U.S dollars in reserve for oil purchases
> > is, in effect, a significant subsidy for the U.S. dollar.)
> >
> > Yet the dynamics go far beyond this, in that
> > conventional economics is undergoing attacks on
> > its false doctrines that must, and should, eventually
> > prevail. For example, the founder of the the GNP
> > concept, Nobel Laureate Kuznets, cautioned that the
> > GNP (or GDP today) did not measure national well
> > being. GDP is essentially a calculator without a minus
> > key, so that the Exxon Valdez disaster, the Manitoba
> > flood etc. etc. etc.raised the GDPs of their respective
> > economies, because more money circulated. Yet tangible
> > wealth was lost and fiancial debt was increased.
> >
> > Dan Parker
> > www.socialcredit.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Paul Moore" <moorepa#@no-spam> wrote in message
> > news:z2CLa.8542$a51.6612@no-spam
> > >
> > > "vote_ethnique" <soul_scanner66@no-spam> wrote in message
> > > news:79d6075a.0306251139.7e7709c4@no-spam
> > >
> > > > > Mr. Hearn's opinion on Canada and world economic matters can
> > > be
> > > > > be read in his interview with FP columnist Diane Francis
> > > below:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id=805271EB-6D4
> > > 1-4AC2-8A00-98C615FE506D
> > > >
> > > > Most Canadians disagree. The U.N. has consistently rated Canada
> > > as
> > > > having the highest standard of living. Most Canadians agree,
> > > which is
> > > > why these kinds of ideologically skewed claims get nowhere
> > > politcally.
> > >
> > > No, the UN at one time rated Canada as the best place to live -
> > > based on a variety of sometimes arbitrary criteria.
> > > I believe we've fallen to third on that list. In purely economic
> > > terms we were never number one, and have been slipping in most
> > > references for some years. Our standard of living, our health
> > > care system, our disposable income, child poverty, etc. etc. have
> > > been falling behind others who have been rising, including the
> > > US.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>