Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

segnosaur

Members
  • Content Count

    2,562
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About segnosaur

  • Rank
    Full Member

Recent Profile Visitors

7,363 profile views
  1. First of all, it would have been nice to actually give a few more details... like the company name, what they manufacture, etc. Was the billion a loan that's been paid back or grant? Secondly, it would also be useful to get a link to the actual article itself. News sources are dynamic... who knows if someone will be able to find your article if they don't see your post for a few hours. Lastly, keep in mind that The Rebel as a source is... a little questionable. I voted conservative in the last election, and even I think they may be taking things too far to the right. I'd prefer seein
  2. Because development of modern fighter jets is extremely expensive, and would likely cost much more than the ~$40 billion we'd be spending to purchase and fly the F35 (or an alternate) for the next few decades. A lot of people like to hold up the Avro Arrow as an example of what our aerospace industry can do, but one of the reasons the Arrow was developed was because we thought we could sell it to other countries (for example the U.K.) But when Britain failed to express an interest, it meant the entire cost of the program would be payed for by Canada, which probably contributed to its canc
  3. They can't find qualified people in a population of 330 million? Things like software development require skills that just are not that common. And unlike (for example) manufacturing work (where there is a lot of replication), there can be a substantial difference in the abilities of someone who can just do the job and someone who can do the job very well. Companies naturally want the best. (I've worked in the computer field for for decades, and I can certainly say I've seen my fair share of people who supposedly have the qualifications but are still pretty inept.) And while the
  4. I assume that the numbers were calculated by doing some sort of average over every year of the president's term. Its a dumb statistic to look at, since it ignores the fact that a president can inherit a strong economy and drive it into the ground (giving better looking numbers), leaving the economy in shambles for his successor to pick up. Given the fact that the referenced article didn't give details about how the numbers were calculated suggests the source of that statistic knows that its deceptive. It also ignores the fact that a president's ability to handle deficit is strongly impact
  5. Not sure if such a blanket statement is really warranted. Remember, at the same time that we had Pierre Trudeau getting us started on our huge federal debt, we had the progressive conservative party running Ontario (who were relatively moderate as conservatives go, but still further to the political right than Trudeau). And while we had Jean "Lets buy the same helicopters we just cancelled" Chretien in charge federally, we also had Mike Harris running ontario, who managed to keep Ontario doing fairly well despite a steep drop in Transfers from the feds. At least if provinces have mor
  6. Probably not. I know you were probably joking about at least some stuff in your posting, but Bush is more likely to oppose Trump than support him. Supposedly, during Trump's innaguration speech, Bush was heard to say "That was some weird... stuff" (substituting stuff for another word.) He's also been critical of several of Trump's actions, like his attacks on the media. http://www.snopes.com/2017/03/31/bush-trumps-inauguration-weird-sht/ https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/27/us/politics/george-w-bush-criticism-trump.html?_r=0 I'm not saying Bush was a great president (I can ce
  7. In general, the provinces handle: - Education (as you mentioned) - Health care (although they do have to fall under the Federal Health Act, which mandates things like universality, provinces still have significant leeway in deciding what services are listed with health care, where hospitals are located, etc.) - Managing resources (public land, timber, etc.) and provincial utilities - Welfare (at least I think...can't remember if that changed) - Interacting with cities/towns The federal government handles: - Defense - International trade - Coastal fi
  8. Just wondering what exactly you think that article says? It certainly doesn't support the myth that Obama was deliberately spying on Trump and/or having his phone tapped. What it does say is that Trump associates were caught up in surveilance of foreign officials. (That article doesn't mention Russia, but I suspect they were referring to Russian contacts.) The only thing new/different about this particular piece is the fact that it indicates Rice wanted to "unmask" the names of those people, whereas normally that information is redacted. If Trump associates WERE collaborating with Russian
  9. Note that in my post I specifically said conservatives/republicans were for free trade in recent history. It is true... in the early 20th century it tended to be the left-wing/liberals that favored free trade. But that shifted in the middle part of the last century, and the 2 groups ended up changing sides, with the left-wing becoming more protectionist and the right-wing becoming more pro-trade.
  10. Keep in mind that the "right wing" is not some monolithic entity that always has the exact same attitudes on every single issue. There can be variations, depending on how a person prioritizes certain policies. (e.g. a right wing person may want to cut taxes, and the deficit and increase military spending, but often those policies run contradictory to each other. Trump has proposed cutting taxes and increasing military spending, but the ultimate effect will be to drive up the deficit.) Its also possible for someone to be a conservative, but still favor some social programs that help the le
  11. You know, Trump has gotten a lot of criticism by many in the high-tech industry... they think many of his policies will negatively affect America in general, and tech industries specifically. (Immigration policies will affect the ability of tech companies to find qualified individuals, and the potential impact of a trade war will affect their ability to make sales.) However, we now have evidence that Trump will actually benefit the tech industry. His activities have personally inspired the creation of the following: From: http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-tweet-burning-robot-twitt
  12. Uhhh... no. Not on the material that was leaking from the building, that you claim was melted steel but was more likely melted aluminum (which has a much lower melting point than steel.) If you truly believe in "science" then explain why it can't be aluminium, since: - There is a huge supply of it (from the plane) - Temperatures in the building were high enough to melt alimimum Occam's razor. I suggest you try it. The fact that you seem to cling to the "melted steel" idea when a more logical explaination exists flies in the face of rational thinking.
  13. Next thing you know you'll be coming up with super duper Extra-nanothermites. Or maybe the aliens from Planet Gorblax used ray guns. So if you think that buildings can be weakened before collapse, what actually triggered the collapse? Still waiting for your complete description of what happened on 9/11. Can you do it? I think not!
  14. No, I think I will keep pointing out one simple fact... That you are unable to actually come up with a coherent description about what happened on 9/11. Still waiting. Tick tock, tick tock.
  15. So, what you're saying is that you can set off an explosion in a building, and then wait minutes before there is any damage to the building? Wow, that's amazing. How exactly does that happen? Force fields? Giant magnets? Seriously... I want to know how that happens. How do you use thermite or something similar to burn through a building's supports yet have that same building stand for several minutes after the supports have supposedly all been melted away.
×
×
  • Create New...