meant to put a question mark behind ass man because I'm not going to resort to name calling cause its normally a sign of admitting you're wrong.

Well, about a free Québec, leaving Canada, that's another debate, would be really complex to start that and could create strong rivalty wich might be fun, but well, let's dont do it.Like I said in my post, my boss is english. In fact the western part of the center of Montréal Island is all english.So yes english people from the rest of Canada come here often. Mostly from Ontario, New-Brunswick and Manitoba.but yes you are right, lot of quebecers go outside to find some work. And you know, lot of quebecers too feel canadians even if they are french speaking people, some of them will do anything to stay in Canada. There might be many reasons other than money, like I know myself lot of people who did it. To be honest, my last hope is to go in the west of Canada, but that might be a bad idea I got from them that is not true anymore.


--Still, in 1994 when we tried to separate, tons of groups of western english from the west came here making public demonstration to convince us to stay, giving money to federalists groups, using intidimation against Québec citizen, insulting the people. That was a democratic process, so they didnt had the right to do that. I just remember that, I was 12 years old and I was not able to understand what they were saying, but I didnt felt good about it.


About the economy in Québec,

the difference here, is that most of people dont need 80 000$ by year to be happy people, so they consider 30 000 to 40 000$ a year is good for them.

Why ?

Because of our whole social system who give them a chance to live, not only to work.

Generally in the world, lot of people are not really working, and lives with multi-million dollars. So why would some people start bashing thoses who prefer to live an happy life with less money if they are still people who work and contribute to the system ? To be simple, they contribute to the system, so the system is making benefits for them, it's how it work

I pulled that from your post, made it funny, and gave it back to you. so according to you, you must be admitting your wrong?



Your kidding rite?? remember that i did not say double the fees, i said double the budget.

But i do get your point, your talking about value for money, what is the best education you can get for your buck. However for me, i would choose a university based on its reputation in the business world, since as i mentioned before, When you are standing in line for a job, with a degree in your hand, standing behind 50 other people with degrees in their hands, what counts is the perception of the employer.

hehehe thats ok.

I know you didn't call me ass man, but you did introduce the word 'ass' against me in an insulting way, so that gave me licence to label you as ass man, but in a playful/sarcastic way, i wasn't trying to be malicious.

Thank you for that Evil, Don't ever think I am the first to shed a tear or feel disgraced for our way of life, that isnt the point, we have the power to raise world standards and maybe share a prosperous future, I am happy for the benifits my western lifestyle gives me and in some ways amazed as how easy it is to live here.

I just think that we should try and look to the future with some sort of understanding as to what it means to be so blessed, with this in mind, would it hurt our economies so much if our " bleeding hearts" trouble those without one. if some think so, then tough, maybe they shouldn't be so self absorbed.

P.s. It says a lot when all the posts on here seem to point at poverty in their own countries, I was refering more to other countries being exploited but it is a tragic fact that poverty is mostly exploited at home,
Maybe we should all fix ourselves before trying to fix the world.

It's all a matter of priority, is starvation worse then unemployment?
Are forigners living standards less important than our neighbours?


We all have a duty to help our own. out fellow citizens, but it's a big world and were all the same, so where does our fellow man end?
At our borders or further.

Marcus

I really like this thread so in an effort to keep it going I want to ask how exactly could we fix poverty? I'll start in the US. If we raise minimum wage significantly that will not neccessarily help due to the fact that wages reflect what a business can afford to make and would hurt the smaller businesses more than the super elite rich who will just downsize a company or two. One major thing that would need to happen would be to tighten our oversight on companies and thier practices and for local goverments to stop giving huge tax breaks to non industrial businesses unless they are local. Wal-Marts should not get a free cut on their property taxes for example but I can understand how a small community would make this choice for a factory since the jobs could literally double its yearly income. Of course the same could be said for Wal-Marts too. Catch 22 I guess but I still think more localized economies are friendlier to the workers.

Lobyists should be eliminated from goverment. Politicians should have to follow SEC (college basketball) rules. No cars, no gifts, you step up to play ball with the shirt on your back and you get payed the same as any other public servant. This would be hard to enforce but I think it would make the difference and change the paradigm of politics. It seems whoever has the best looking ads and the biggest jet wins the elections anyway, if lobyists where eliminated then we would all be sure the guy with any jet at all was sucking the proverbial teet. This would help make sure laws are made for the people and not for the companies that can buy a suit and a smile.

More socialization of certain things like higher education, and healthcare is a great idea and would definantly help alleviate the stresses on the lower and middle class (the poor and the getting poor) but really as our system stands now we cannot accurately regulate and control the systems we have in place such as welfare and social security. Property taxes should be eliminated for everyone. Not just the rich as it stands now but everyone. Once you buy a plot and stick a house on it, it shoudl be yours. Thats one of the things we actually did start this country for. Income tax should also be fair for everyone. If you make 5 billion a year and I make 5 thousand you should have to pay 2 billion and I should pay 2 thousand. After that is said and done I should be able to get social support out of your 2 billion to pay for the fact that my 5k won't keep me alive 6 months. Its not about who is stronger or who deserves it more or any of that crap its about SOCIAL WELFARE. Whats good for society. You're 5 billion won't matter much btw if enough people are so poor they will willingly stab you for a 5 dollar bill or if the country you are in falls apart in a social revolution.

World poverty seems to be even more complicated. Is free market capitalism the answer? China seems to be leaning that way and russia has. A more globalized economy? Europe seems to think that helps but many of the so called undeveloped countries don't seem to want that. Might be the kids making tennis shoes thing or it might just be something cultural about not wanting to be assimilated into a globalized market.

You have touched on a key issue here... I remember when i used to see people wasting money and recources to help animals, and i would think that those people would be far better off helping poor suffering humans instead!

I realised that it is the wrong way to think. There are so many things we could try to fix, there are so many different priorities and problems, it is not right to just work on the worst things and ignore everything else... What i mean to say is, "to each his own". So if you are passionate about animals, then you should help animals, if you are passionate about helping suffering people overseas, then help those people, if you are passionate about helping suffering people in your own country then do that, so yes, "to each his own" truely defines our path to making the world a better place.

well, i don't know what country you're in, but if you're an American voter, you might consider registering at one.org. it's a letter-writing organization (heck, you don't even need to vote or have the right, as long as you live somewhere with congressional representation).

also, i think you bring up many of the major things that could happen to reduce or eliminate poverty. in addition, a lot of the welfare programs we have in place now would work a lot better if they received just a bit more funding and if red tape were cut down for those seeking aid. public agencies in the U.S. at least tend overwhelmingly to be under-staffed, under-funded and overworked.

but the U.S. alone has the power to end extreme poverty globally (by 'alone' i mean that we could do it on our own if we chose to, not that we're the only ones who could). there are a lot of things we could do to make the world a better place. people too easily say there wouldn't be money, but i honestly don't believe that. the very rich don't need to make as much as they do. most of us posting on here don't have have an accurate concept of what 'very rich' means on a practical level. businesses evade taxes. we dump untold billions into funding an offensive military. no, it wouldn't be easy. it wouldn't be cheap. it certainly wouldn't happen over night. but i believe in my heart of hearts we stand at a point in history where we command the power to end poverty, epidemics, and all that. maybe we wouldn't see the end result in our lifetimes, but our kids and grand kids would certainly live in a better world.

the problem is belief. these are things i believe. other people believe in other things. many believe such dreams as mine are impossible. the fact that everyone has the same objections doesn't make those objections anymore valid, only more widely believed. the beliefs that hold us to this lifestyle of mediocrity and inequity are deeply imbedded in our culture, our daily lifestyles, and possibly even in the things we seek to bring about.

i can't help but notice that, here in the U.S. at least, the dissenters are more often people who've had some trauma in their life. sometimes it's being born on the less-priveledged side of race, gender, etc. sometimes it's just bad luck, and it's not a guarantee. but what seems to be the case to me is that being born into more economic affluence makes people selfish and short-sighted. i believe little will change until the culture changes, until people's beliefs change. that view certainly makes me an idealist, and i guess i'm like Weber in that respect (see The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism).

in at least one of my sociology classes, my professor said her preferred definition for class is hinged on "life chances," i.e., the chances you'll do ________ given your circumstances at birth. "_________" can be anything from "have indoor plumbing" to "go to college" to "live past the age of 50." i think that's a very good definition because it goes a little past 'standard of living,' which doesn't tend to focus on changes throughout an invidiual's lifetime.



we also use the death penalty more frequently than China or the Soviet Union ever did.



this doesn't even account for the number of people who refuse to declare bankruptcy (or under the new, stricter laws, don't qualify) and struggle through their entire lives with these debts - never being able to qualify a mortgage or even an auto loan. nice, huh?

why should people care that the U.S. openly kills more of its own people than any other developed country? oh that's easy, it's called decency.

you're right, though, to a degree. however, the U.S. has also killed with impunity and is still doing so. you think the McCarthy era didn't see people just disappear without due process?

we should care because we like to tout ourselves as leaders of the modern world, yet so much of what we do is pretty damnably barbaric.

I don't think the American federal government is in controll of the death penalty,,, it is a state issue is it not? which is kinda weird, since you would think that life and death might qualify as being more important than state rights??

The Death penalty is a state right issue yes.



I disagree.