• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

Re: OT: Canadian Politics

For the record though: there are very, very few ridings in all of Canada that are not white-majority to start with, even in the cities. Arguing against including constituencies with 45+% of the population as belonging to a visible minority group in a discussion about ethnic communities is just silly.

I honestly expected more from you than that sort of intentional obtuseness.

A place like Brampton-Springdale for instance, has only 78,000 people out of 148,000 identifying as speaking English as their first language. 63,000 speak a non-official language. That's 43% of the riding, but under your definition it wouldn't qualify as being a heavily ethnic-laden community because it's very slightly majority white.

Any community with more than 20% of its residents belonging to a visible minority group (which is greater than the percentage of non-white residents of Canada) should be considered a riding with a heavy ethnic presence.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

You're entitled to your opinion. I just think it's inherently flawed.
Click to expand...

Which is weird, considering the fact that all of these assertions are based off of one election return, in which the most dominant political party in Canadian history suffered a historic defeat that polling numbers since suggest won't be repeating itself during the next election.

Again, I think you're failing to see the difference (through blue tinted glasses this time) between "making in roads" and being a brokerage party. One election result where the results among visible minorities aren't embarrassing doesn't suggest some sort of long term shift in voting habits. Call me in 14-15 if there is a repeat and maybe there's a legitimate argument for being a brokerage party, but right now they're a regional party that feasted on the corpse of the formely entitled "natural governing party".

All of this screams wishful thinking from a faithful party follower, nothing more.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

One thing though, minorities vote for most part more than whites. I did enumeration and poll clerking back in 1984 so ancient history but all the indians in the riding voted, whites were about 50%.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

It's because one of the most quintessential aspects of citizenship is voting. They don't take such a privilege for granted - it's emblematic of their new identity.
 
Re: OT: Canadian Politics

TheCountofMonteCristo said:
One thing though, minorities vote for most part more than whites. I did enumeration and poll clerking back in 1984 so ancient history but all the indians in the riding voted, whites were about 50%.
Click to expand...

It's actually entirely dependent on culture of origin.

South Asians (Indians, Tamils, etc.) vote religiously because it's engrained in the culture. Election Day in India is actually like three days and the lines are often miles long.

Chinese Canadians from the mainland actually don't vote in overwhelming numbers. Chinese Canadians from Taiwan on the other hand, do.

Korean Canadians are incredibly reliable voters. Vietnamese Canadians aren't.
 
Deckie007 said:
New/Old Testament God killed over 2 Million people by all accounts...doubt Allah killed that many in the Quran.
Click to expand...

Which is kind of similar to saying that Gandalf killed more Orcs in LoTR than Luke killed clone soldiers in Star Wars.

Tis all just a bit of fiction, with Islam having the best twist ending. I mean, riding to heaven on a winged ass? Who saw that coming?
 
MindzEye said:
Which is kind of similar to saying that Gandalf killed more Orcs in LoTR than Luke killed clone soldiers in Star Wars.

Tis all just a bit of fiction, with Islam having the best twist ending. I mean, riding to heaven on a winged ass? Who saw that coming?
Click to expand...

It's not the same. LOTR is fiction, a lot of what happened in the bible is not; a lot of people died real deaths, in the name of a god. We have to never forget that, can't let those type of people have power.

It's a big reason I would never vote Republican.
 
link
In fact, the article goes into some great detail on the many benefits of Obamacare. It claims about 80 to 90 percent of people who, according to the non-partisan CBO, use the state exchanges will qualify for federal subsidies to reduce or eliminate costs.

The article also goes on to tell how the 41% figure was calculated, essentially saying that specific health care coverages and plans were picked to artificially create a much lower 2013 average premium expense. For example, the individuals they used for the 41% figure were taken from a much healthier pool of people than the average population. Of course, healthier people usually pay less for health care.

Now the article does allude to one group of people which might see their premiums increase—young, healthy individuals who buy their own coverage. But, that’s of course before you factor in subsidies that will offset some of the cost. Older, pre-Medicare individuals will most likely see lower premiums.

The article also states that because of the requirements the Affordable Care Act establishes, most citizens will have access to a wider range of health care services.
Click to expand...
A tweet meant to bash ObamaCare, helps prove how it works. Atta boy, Johnny. Don't bother reading the article.
 
link
Bit by bit, agreement by agreement, Canada is giving away more and more in the name of trade. To Conservatives, none of this is a threat to our sovereignty, as if the very act of stating so makes it so.

But let us consider this fantasy scenario: RCMP officers stopping American citizens on the Buffalo side of their border. Picture the horrified expression of those resilient New Yorkers as they are forced to slow down on their Interstate highway so as to be greeted by a smiling RCMP officer who is to inspect their property, ask questions about where they live, where they've come from, and the like -- all part of a so called "pre-clearing" program.

Of course, this scene would never occur. The United States protects, obsessively, their sovereignty. But here in Canada, armed American police officers will now be able to stop Canadians, in Canada, inspecting, checking and asking questions.

Again, the Conservatives will tell us that an armed American cop in Canada is all about trade, jobs and security, not sovereignty. If this is true, then can we not expect to see Mounties stopping Americans on the Buffalo side?
Click to expand...
The silence on this is deafening.
American border guards already work on Canadian soil in Windsor, in a little shack beside a railway line that eventually makes it's way under the Detroit river into the U.S. Do we have Canadian guards over in Detroit watching the trains coming our way? No. And why not? Because they won't allow them.
If you cross into the U.S., and are pulled into secondary inspection, the guards there have access to the RCMP database to verify your lack of criminal record. Do we get access to their FBI database? Why not?
It's sickening to see what lengths Harper will go to please his masters in Washington. They say "jump," and he asks "how high" without any thought of reciprocal help. It's truly abhorrent, but nobody should be surprised.
We signed NAFTA in good faith with our closest trading partner, only to be screwed when our softwood lumber arrived at their border. Because of supply and demand, their own softwood lumber industry can hardly compete with ours, so they collected duties on our softwood lumber that were illegal under NAFTA. They did this for years. We asked for the monies back, and for the tariffs to be removed, as per NAFTA - nothing. It went to arbitration, which ruled in our favour not just once; not twice; but THREE TIMES.
Then Harper won.
In his first week in office, he forgave the $1M they owed us in illegal tariffs, and we still pay them to this day.
We need a PM that serves THIS country, not theirs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top