August1991

Clueless.

I just returned from a trip abroad, trying to understand airports, taxis. If I were a foreigner, YUL is seriously f*cked up. ========= En passant: À Bruxelles, avant embarquement, j'ai vu de jeunes filles couraient à joie, malgré la mère couverte. Destination : Montréal.

Nefarious, What will federal Liberals - Trudeau Jnr - do on October 22?

The sharp decline in cigarette smoking occurred in the late 1950s when numerous reliable studies were first published. (Watch any Hollywood movie made in the 1940s compared to a movie made in, say, the 1990s or so. And they say society follows culture.... ) ===== Eyeball, You make a very good point. The issue is about the scientific method. Smoking cigarettes is potential harm to one person. Issuing CO2 is potential harm to our planet.

Precisely. ===== It's not about personal value - it's about control.

Amazing, no response to this thread. ===== Ir's unlikely that Trudeau/Scheer will win a majority in 2019... Then what?

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/rex-murphy-apparently-world-savers-dont-need-to-worry-about-the-little-people#comments-area Rex Murphy wrote an article (linked above) vilifying Elizabeth May as a 21st century Stalinist/prohibitionist. IMV, he entirely missed the point. ==== Green voters view themselves as people (circa 1960) opposed to smoking/littering. Everyone now knows that smoking cigarettes causes cancer. Littering is now frowned, it faces serious fines - and few people do it. IOW, in the mind of Green voters, their progressive ideas were successful. Fewer people now smoke cigarettes and fewer people litter. Greens wish to limit CO2 emissions in the same way that we now have fewer people smoking cigarettes and arguably less litter.

Argus, People have always been lonely. Nowadays, they can talk about it. For example, have you read a Jane Austen novel?

Situation 1: You clearly win more seats than Scheer and the Conservatives - say, your 154 vs Scheer's 142. It's 1972 all over again. Meet the GG, form a government, go to the Commons. Test your confidence. Situation 2: You win fewer seats than Scheer and the Conservatives - say, even, your 152 vs Scheer's 153. Resign. Let Scheer go to the GG and form a government. It's 1979 all over again. === In Situation 2, don't do a BC 2017.

At the time, I thought that Bush Jnr was wrong to invade Iraq. Why? Iraq, like Canada, is a complicated place.

Haven't read the thread. IMHO, Alberta will not separate from Canada unless northern BC does too.

Strongly disagree. 1. Define "deficit". Canada - the millions of people living here - we have created a large sustainable wealth. What real wealth has Norway created that is sustainable? And in Quebec, what is sustainable? America? 2. Money terms? English Canada now has a CPPIB. Quebec has a "Catholic" Caisse. Typical Lutherans, Norwegians also believe that they have saved for the future. 3. Yet, how has any person in Canada, Norway, Quebec truly saved - compared to a mother/father in China/India? ===== The Norwegian "Statens pensjonsfond" has about $1 trillion - on paper. This wealth is entirely based on typical Lutheran belief that a paper claim on a real asset is legitimate, and will be honoured.

Disagree. Left? Right? Team A? B? The problem with "leftists" is not "necessities/bad habits". The problem is that "some people" want to decide/control the choices of "other people". Yet, to co-operate, we need to get along. ==== Egghead, True - it may take time before the price of stupid changes choices. But look around the universe. When the price of stupid is high, there's less stupid.

Armchairprophet, I admire both your naivety and your cynicism. ==== So, let's agree: Changing incentives changes behaviour. The greater the cost of doing something stupid, the less people do stupid.

Raising the price/tax of cigarettes reduces the consumption/purchase of cigarettes - even if the government gives back all the money raised to everyone, including non-smokers.