Canadian government declares war on drugs

[Ryan Thunder]

I don't get it.

Why does everybody hate him again?

I hope it isn't just for the sake of hating on the Conservatives, because that would just be dumb...

Complete failure of environmental policies. Instead of outright reduction in greenhouse gas production as laid out in Kyoto, he's now changed it to a reduction per unit of economic output. In other words, as long as we make an incremental gain in efficiency, we can actually pollute more.

Well what did you expect them to do, shut off the power until the problem's completely solved?

Its efficiency that's the problem. If efficiency improves enough we can still cut down on pollution without destroying the economy. (and yes, I realize that the pollution could destroy our economy eventually anyways, but we can't really solve the problem without one...)

Also related to the environment, the debacle that is the oil sands projects which are sucking rivers dry and leaving huge lakes of contaminated waste, lakes which are larger than many towns. The water & land will remain contaminated for many generations. I might also add that these projects are producing huge amounts of CO2 and have denuded countless square kilometres of virgin forests.

CBC would jump on something like this... Where the hell are they?

Then there's the retarded decision to increase the ethanol content of gasoline, which has actually ended up as a net energy loss, and when the energy to produce that ethanol is factored in there's a net increase in CO2 emissions.

Hmm, that does sound dumb.

And of course there's the countless attempts to ban gay marriage, and this latest assinine drug policy among other things.

I heard they were leaving it alone. I could care less either way, its not really a "right" to have it legally recognized anyways. At least, not any more than it is the "right" of a conventional couple to have their union legally recognized.

[Ryan Thunder]

Ghetto edit: Forgot to mention;

[...] Many see the costs of the Kyoto Protocol as outweighing the benefits, some believing the standards which Kyoto sets to be too optimistic, others seeing a highly inequitable and inefficient agreement which would do little to curb greenhouse gas emissions. [...]

[J]

Complete failure of environmental policies. Instead of outright reduction in greenhouse gas production as laid out in Kyoto, he's now changed it to a reduction per unit of economic output. In other words, as long as we make an incremental gain in efficiency, we can actually pollute more.

Well what did you expect them to do, shut off the power until the problem's completely solved?

Wow, a black & white and a false dilema fallacy all in one sentence!

Its efficiency that's the problem. If efficiency improves enough we can still cut down on pollution without destroying the economy. (and yes, I realize that the pollution could destroy our economy eventually anyways, but we can't really solve the problem without one...)

Here's a hint for you, there are no hard efficiency targets nor goals in any of Harper's policies. There's a vague "we'll reduce greenhouse gas emissions per unit of economic output by 25% by 2025", but get this, it's not signed into law, nor is there any actual enforcement of this vague target. It's nothing but a feel-good do nothing statement. Here's another clue for you, what happens when Canada's economic output rises by 3% a year when the cuts from the efficiency gains are only 1.4% a year? Net emissions still go up.


However, that's all secondary to an earlier question I asked, which I'll repeat for you again. What exactly needed to be done when the Liberals were in power? What did our country need that the Liberals didn't do? I expect an answer.

[Darth Wong]

I doubt he'll answer that question. He totally ignored my almost identical question which was posted before yours. He just says that the country was "stagnating" under the Liberals because it's something his peer group or his daddy says. It's meaningless negative tripe which doesn't have to be backed up with specific examples.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Well what did you expect them to do, shut off the power until the problem's completely solved?

Its efficiency that's the problem. If efficiency improves enough we can still cut down on pollution without destroying the economy. (and yes, I realize that the pollution could destroy our economy eventually anyways, but we can't really solve the problem without one...)

Anyone sincere about GHG would set both efficiency mandates and total caps with progressively declining allowance because otherwise you run into Jevon's Paradox, a well understood concept in basic economics. So he's bullshitting for green leanings in the electorate while really looking to suck corporate polluter cock. What're you rolling your eyes for? What's your education? Or age? I'm studying economics and sustainability. Are you an econ grad? Where are you getting your pedestal to condescend from, asshole?

[Ryan Thunder]

Well what did you expect them to do, shut off the power until the problem's completely solved?

Wow, a black & white and a false dilema fallacy all in one sentence!

Hey, you asked for it. Its not like the Liberal government was any better in that regard.

Its efficiency that's the problem. If efficiency improves enough we can still cut down on pollution without destroying the economy. (and yes, I realize that the pollution could destroy our economy eventually anyways, but we can't really solve the problem without one...)

Here's a hint for you, there are no hard efficiency targets nor goals in any of Harper's policies. There's a vague "we'll reduce greenhouse gas emissions per unit of economic output by 25% by 2025", but get this, it's not signed into law, nor is there any actual enforcement of this vague target.

Ah, ok.

Here's another clue for you, what happens when Canada's economic output rises by 3% a year when the cuts from the efficiency gains are only 1.4% a year? Net emissions still go up.

I realize that. In spite of this fact, we're contributing next to nothing to the problem anyways, compared to nations like China and the US, who seem to produce more pollution than the rest of the world put together.

However, that's all secondary to an earlier question I asked, which I'll repeat for you again. What exactly needed to be done when the Liberals were in power? What did our country need that the Liberals didn't do? I expect an answer.

Government support for research into reducing global greenhouse gas levels, alternate fuel supplies to get us off this ridiculous dependency on Middle Eastern oil, etc. More funding for doctors and the health care system so people don't need to go on a trip to the States to get it. Things like that.

What're you rolling your eyes for? What's your education? Or age? I'm studying economics and sustainability. Are you an econ grad?

1st-year Computer Science at the University of Toronto. Certainly not an economics degree by any stretch of the imagination, so I submit to your superiority in that regard.

[brianeyci]

First year means nothing Ryan. I'm a senior and I know exactly what it takes to get it: 90 in high school. It also means you are not guaranteed a spot in computer science unless you get 60 in MAT237 or CSC165 (maybe 50 they've been lowering the standard). Hordes of people fail to do this every single year. You do not pick a POST until second year, because they know tons of people wipe out.

So technically you aren't even in the computer science stream yet.

Anybody remind you how low you are on the food chain? First year means jack shit.

Someone told me in class the other day, anybody under 30 who votes Conservative is a retard. More funding for doctors and health care? Give me a break, you sound like a Conservative mouthpiece.

[aerius]

Here's another clue for you, what happens when Canada's economic output rises by 3% a year when the cuts from the efficiency gains are only 1.4% a year? Net emissions still go up.

I realize that. In spite of this fact, we're contributing next to nothing to the problem anyways, compared to nations like China and the US, who seem to produce more pollution than the rest of the world put together.

We're actually worse than the US when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions per person. I believe we're tied with Australia for dead last in this category. But hey, we don't have too many people, so guess by your retarted reasoning we're free to pollute as much as we want.

What exactly needed to be done when the Liberals were in power? What did our country need that the Liberals didn't do? I expect an answer.

Government support for research into reducing global greenhouse gas levels,

Did it, almost all programs were killed by the Conservatives. Same with subsidies for energy efficient items such as compact fluorescent lightbulbs, efficient appliances, etc.

alternate fuel supplies to get us off this ridiculous dependency on Middle Eastern oil

What the fuck do you think the Terra Nova, White Rose, and Sable Island offshore projects are for, along with the tar sands projects? There's also the biofuels research funding, all done by the Liberals. BTW, the Conservatives have killed alternative energy funding.

[aerius]

First year means nothing Ryan. <snip>

Anybody remind you how low you are on the food chain? First year means jack shit.

I believe the words you're looking for are "dumb frosh!"

[Illuminatus Primus]

I realize that. In spite of this fact, we're contributing next to nothing to the problem anyways, compared to nations like China and the US, who seem to produce more pollution than the rest of the world put together.

You think if the U.S. cut to zilch along with China that would just make everything happy? Canada's emissions per capita and per unit of imports are probably nothing to sneeze at. People like to "blame" China, but in an economy like both yours and mine, there'd be no Chinese environmental problem if our corporations weren't over there subsidizing the cheap ass products we buy with slave labor and abysmal regulatory infrastructure.

[Fiji_Fury]

Why does everybody hate him again?

Also related to the environment, the debacle that is the oil sands projects which are sucking rivers dry and leaving huge lakes of contaminated waste, lakes which are larger than many towns. The water & land will remain contaminated for many generations. I might also add that these projects are producing huge amounts of CO2 and have denuded countless square kilometres of virgin forests.

CBC would jump on something like this... Where the hell are they?

1) Why don't I like Harper? I consider him a double-speaking soulless monster. More on this in a moment.

2) Use Google Earth. You can see the fuckin' oilsands projects from SPACE at low magnification. It's a blight on the face of the province. I can't accurately say why the CBC hasn't put more reporting into the area and its environmental issues.

Harper's government trashed most of the environmental research funding and initiatives provided by the previous Liberal government. They didn't even have a policy for the environment in the last election. Their idea of environmental stewardship: send your Environmental Minister everywhere wearing a green tie. Green. Get it?

Not even to mention the embarrasment that is our Energy Minister, John Baird, or Stephen Harper himself showing up at international meetings with the environment on the agenda and touting Canada as a "leader" when they refuse to even consider progress toward the Kyoto protocol; the agreement signed by CANADA. They keep treating the issue as though PR spin can make it go away. They are effectively damaging Canada's foreign credibility while attempting to play a shell game with Canadian voters. Contempt is not a strong enough word to describe how I feel for Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada.

You may have a different opinion, but don't be surprised that other Canadians are unwilling to swallow the bullshit you so enthusiastically support.

[Fiji_Fury]

Oops - Sorry for the double post. I mislabelled the quote. I'm replying to Ryan Thunder, not J.

[Elaro]

They are effectively damaging Canada's foreign credibility while attempting to play a shell game with Canadian voters. Contempt is not a strong enough word to describe how I feel for Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada.

And then they have the gall to claim that the increase in the military in the Afghan mission (which, IIRC, began with the Conservatives) is there to improve Canada's role in international affairs! We were perfectly fine with our role beforehand, thankyouverymuch!

Gah. I have the right to vote now. I think I'm gonna use it.

[Ryan Thunder]

First year means nothing Ryan. I'm a senior and I know exactly what it takes to get it: 90 in high school. It also means you are not guaranteed a spot in computer science unless you get 60 in MAT237 or CSC165 (maybe 50 they've been lowering the standard). Hordes of people fail to do this every single year. You do not pick a POST until second year, because they know tons of people wipe out.

Odd. I seem to be doing better than I ever was in high school already. Except for that dumb calculus course, but that's thanks to a particularly retarded marking scheme on our first test (you could feasibly get all but two of some 12-15 questions right, and get a zero. Or you could earn a 66% and get a hundred for it.)

Anyways, I've inevitably ended up helping nearly everyone I've encountered so far, so I'm obviously not as stupid as you'd like to think.

So technically you aren't even in the computer science stream yet.

Anybody remind you how low you are on the food chain? First year means jack shit.

Yes. I wasn't stating it to impress anybody... They asked, and I answered.

Someone told me in class the other day, anybody under 30 who votes Conservative is a retard.

Your appeal to authority (if one could call "someone ... in class" an authority) amuses me, but beyond that its meaningless.

---

But hey, we don't have too many people, so guess by your retarted reasoning we're free to pollute as much as we want.

You're making shit up. That's not what I said (or thought) at all.

Government support for research into reducing global greenhouse gas levels,

Did it, almost all programs were killed by the Conservatives.

Probably because, after more than a decade of Liberal control, they still had nothing to show for it. I don't recall hearing about anything terribly stupendous coming out of Canada in that respect.

Same with subsidies for energy efficient items such as compact fluorescent lightbulbs, efficient appliances, etc.

If they're more efficient then they'll be more economical in the long run. Hence no need for a subsidy. Its not as if we're referring to something that's undergoing ground-breaking research at the moment. That would justify a subsidy to speed things along.

It would have been smart of them to promote the technology rather than just yanking everything, though.

alternate fuel supplies to get us off this ridiculous dependency on Middle Eastern oil

What the fuck do you think the Terra Nova, White Rose, and Sable Island offshore projects are for, along with the tar sands projects?

That's delaying the problem, not solving it.

There's also the biofuels research funding, all done by the Liberals. BTW, the Conservatives have killed alternative energy funding.

Well, damn for their stupidity then.

Still can't see myself voting for anything else, though. I mean, we've got an epic liar running the province, can't tolerate that. NDP ruined us last time around. Green Party? I don't even want to know... I seem to remember one of their candidates in my region saying he wanted to shut down the nuclear power plant and run everything off of the wind.

Fluctuating, unreliable power for the lose.

[brianeyci]

First year means nothing Ryan. I'm a senior and I know exactly what it takes to get it: 90 in high school. It also means you are not guaranteed a spot in computer science unless you get 60 in MAT237 or CSC165 (maybe 50 they've been lowering the standard). Hordes of people fail to do this every single year. You do not pick a POST until second year, because they know tons of people wipe out.

Odd. I seem to be doing better than I ever was in high school already. Except for that dumb calculus course, but that's thanks to a particularly retarded marking scheme on our first test (you could feasibly get all but two of some 12-15 questions right, and get a zero. Or you could earn a 66% and get a hundred for it.)

Anyways, I've inevitably ended up helping nearly everyone I've encountered so far, so I'm obviously not as stupid as you'd like to think.

The Calculus is the meat. The rest is total bullshit anybody can do in their sleep.

By the way I think you're a liar. I am not in first year obviously, but the course website says that the term test hasn't even started yet. In fact they haven't even done the first fucking quiz! It's been less than a fucking month since the semester started. So you're either in some dumb shit Calculus and not in the computer science stream since computer science needs at least 137 or higher (237 is the second year, my mistake), or you're a bald faced liar. Of course anybody who really goes to college knows that the quizes and tests don't happen this early in the year. I have no idea why anybody would lie about being in first year computer science, but maybe you thought that was an impressive qualification and decided to pick somewhere in Toronto because that was Mike's haunt to suck up. I call bald faced liar because midterms don't start for at least another week.

By virtue of you being first year you are dumb. Do you not get it? First year is nothing to brag about and means absolutely nothing dickweed. Do I have to mention it again? Then again maybe you aren't first year at all and you're making it all up.

So technically you aren't even in the computer science stream yet.

Anybody remind you how low you are on the food chain? First year means jack shit.

Yes. I wasn't stating it to impress anybody... They asked, and I answered.

They didn't ask shit dick for brains. They asked if you had an economics degree, and you trot out your "first year" instead of just saying, no I don't have an economics degree. Dumb frosh, if that's what you are.

Someone told me in class the other day, anybody under 30 who votes Conservative is a retard.

Your appeal to authority (if one could call "someone ... in class" an authority) amuses me, but beyond that its meaningless.

---

It's not an appeal to authority retard. It's telling you if you vote Conservative you're voting against your own interests. How many businesses do you own again which will get tax breaks, and how many children do you want to go to faith based schools?

You're an arrogant dick and you'd better get rid of that. I also think you're a liar. Two of the questions worth the entire test? Some kind of marking scheme where you get 66% of the questions and get 100%? Bullshit.

[Erik von Nein]

We're actually worse than the US when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions per person. I believe we're tied with Australia for dead last in this category. But hey, we don't have too many people, so guess by your retarted reasoning we're free to pollute as much as we want.

I'm curious, what's the reason for that? Also, do you have a handy link to some statistics on that? If not, I'll find it on my own, but if it's convenient ...

[Ryan Thunder]

By the way I think you're a liar. I am not in first year obviously, but the course website says that the term test hasn't even started yet. In fact they haven't even done the first fucking quiz! It's been less than a fucking month since the semester started. So you're either in some dumb shit Calculus and not in the computer science stream since computer science needs at least 137 or higher (237 is the second year, my mistake), or you're a bald faced liar. Of course anybody who really goes to college knows that the quizes and tests don't happen this early in the year. I have no idea why anybody would lie about being in first year computer science, but maybe you thought that was an impressive qualification and decided to pick somewhere in Toronto because that was Mike's haunt to suck up. I call bald faced liar because midterms don't start for at least another week.

Wrong campus, hatfucker, I'm at Scarborough.

Not everybody goes to St. George.

I'm in MATA30, lectured by Dr. Natalia Cheredeko. Or well, she tries, but her degree obviously isn't in teaching.

Thank Vaul for TAs...

By virtue of you being first year you are dumb. Do you not get it? First year is nothing to brag about and means absolutely nothing dickweed. Do I have to mention it again? Then again maybe you aren't first year at all and you're making it all up.

Who's bragging?

So technically you aren't even in the computer science stream yet.

Anybody remind you how low you are on the food chain? First year means jack shit.

Yes. I wasn't stating it to impress anybody... They asked, and I answered.

They didn't ask shit dick for brains. They asked if you had an economics degree, and you trot out your "first year" instead of just saying, no I don't have an economics degree. Dumb frosh, if that's what you are.

Perhaps, like a dumbass who doesn't bother to read posts, you failed to notice that they asked what my education was?

It's not an appeal to authority retard.

As you said so eloquently:

Someone told me in class the other day, anybody under 30 who votes Conservative is a retard.

Sure looks like an appeal to authority. Has about as much substance.

How many businesses do you own again which will get tax breaks, and how many children do you want to go to faith based schools?

None, and who's forcing the kids to go? If anything, its a money-hog. I thought it was a dumb idea too.

You're an arrogant dick and you'd better get rid of that. I also think you're a liar. Two of the questions worth the entire test? Some kind of marking scheme where you get 66% of the questions and get 100%? Bullshit.

Call bullshit all you like, dumb fucker, you'll have to read a bit more carefully next time. The test was divided into sections, three questions each. Pass them all, you get 100%, fail any, you get 0%.

[brianeyci]

Scarborough huh, the loser campus. Well that explains a lot. I remember my physics teacher in high school going on about that, how they should call it the University of Scarborough but they don't because they want to piggyback off the reputation of the downtown campus.

What you don't seem to get is a first year frosh is no education at all, especially not less than one month in. "Everybody I've met I've helped" what a joke. You sure got your head up your ass Ryan, shitting out a false dilemma with turning off the power or do nothing about the environment, and swallowing the Liberals didn't put enough money into healthcare bullshit.

Let's see where you are in a few months, whether you've failed Calculus and have to switch majors or drop out. From what I see so far in this and other threads looks like you're failure material.

[Darth Wong]

Ryan, don't brag about having survived one month of first-year uni. You haven't accomplished jack shit yet.

[Adept]

Scarborough huh, the loser campus. Well that explains a lot. I remember my physics teacher in high school going on about that, how they should call it the University of Scarborough but they don't because they want to piggyback off the reputation of the downtown campus

From Frosh Week marches downtown:

"Scarborough, Scarborough, what a waste of time.

A perfect education for a life of fucking crime!

Go back, go back, we know you're on parole!

And if that's not enough, your school's a fucking hole!"

Sung to the tune of "Sailing, Sailing" mind you. I thought it was a really funny cheer, especially since they had nothing clever to shout back. Anyway, I go to UTM (Mississauga), so maybe I shouldn't be tossing stones from a glass house either.

[President Sharky]

The deficit mess that the Chretien government cleaned up was actually started by the free-wheeling government of Pierre Trudeau from the 1970s and 1980s. The size of the deficit relative to GDP was actually at its largest point when Trudeau left office in 1984, something like 9% IIRC. The Mulroney government brought down the size of the deficit to ~6% by 1993. Mind you this occured during the worst recession in North America since the Great Depression. In fact, by 1993 the Mulroney Conservatives were running an operating surplus. The reason the government posted a $42 billion deficit is because they had to spend money on interest payments in order to service the Trudeau government's debt.

Not to mention that the Mulroney government brought in free trade and the GST, economic reforms that laid the groundwork for the Government of Canada to attain a total budget surplus. What Chretien did that Mulroney didn't was cut spending by downloading major costs to the provinces.

And Mike, I can't believe that after Harper being PM for 20 months, you think he will suddenly "Go Bush" on Canada at any given moment. Seriously, that line sounds like it was taken straight from a Liberal campaign pamphlet..or a Stephane Dion speech (all of which provide for great amusement).

[brianeyci]

Hahahaha that's pretty good Adept. Actually I don't live on campus, so I don't get into any of that frosh or college crap at all (one of the things I've regretted.)

In seriousness, I don't give a flying fuck what campus people go to. But when they start bragging about it... well know your hole, know your role.

And Sharky, thing is Mike didn't base his opinion of Harper "turning Bush" on just the past twenty months. If you read the fine print he says Harper's history, which extends beyond his career in politics. If you remember his speeches to religious organizations before he was anywhere near Prime Minister, he said some crazy shit like activist judges and of course the infamous Firewall speech. Not only that, but we'd be in Iraq now if it was up to Harper: this is part of the public record. It's hardly a unique or extraordinary opinion that Harper is a Bush lover. Bush calls him "Steve." Not to mention Mike did qualify it by saying there's two trains of thought: Harper moderated to gain the votes, or he's biding his time, also not something Mike made up.

The problem is we find out for sure if we give Harper a majority government, and that's playing Russian Roulette with Canada. What if America invades Iran? If it was up to Harper, Canada would join right in.

[aerius]

The deficit mess that the Chretien government cleaned up was actually started by the free-wheeling government of Pierre Trudeau from the 1970s and 1980s. The size of the deficit relative to GDP was actually at its largest point when Trudeau left office in 1984, something like 9% IIRC. The Mulroney government brought down the size of the deficit to ~6% by 1993. Mind you this occured during the worst recession in North America since the Great Depression. In fact, by 1993 the Mulroney Conservatives were running an operating surplus. The reason the government posted a $42 billion deficit is because they had to spend money on interest payments in order to service the Trudeau government's debt.

That's a funny one, considering that the national debt was around $160B when Trudeau left office and had gone up to $480B or so by the time Mulroney was done with the mess. Also of note, Mulroney was in power during the greatest economic upswing since the post WWII boom and he still managed to rack up the largest deficits in Canadian history. Your debt as a % of GDP is misleading since the GDP grew a fucking shitload during the mid to late 80's. Furthermore, Trudeau was in charge during the biggest economic slump since the depression, the words "stagflation" and "Arab oil embargo" might mean something to you.

In short, get your facts straight and get a fucking education while you're at it you retarded lying dipshit.

[Darth Wong]

I love the way conservatives always pretend that it's totally absurd woo-woo tinfoil-hat talk to believe that the conservative party is hiding something, even though MacLean's pointed out that this is the most secretive Canadian federal government in living memory. If they're not hiding anything, why are they so secretive?

[aerius]

They'll just claim that MacLean's is a left-wing Liberal mouthpiece magazine. Gee, why does this sound familiar?

Practically every news media outlet in Canada has commented on how the Harper government has gag orders on all their MPs to keep them from saying stupid shit which'll get the government in trouble. Of course, this is clearly another left-wing media conspiracy.