Greetings and welcome to the official homepage of The Aristocracy gaming community!

This website is best viewed on Mozilla Firefox at 1360x746 resolution or higher.

Thank you.


An online competitive gaming community. Est. MMIII
 
HometA HomeCalendarFAQSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Political poll of governing bodies
American governing system
38%
 38% [ 5 ]
Canadian governing system
15%
 15% [ 2 ]
Other
46%
 46% [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 13
 

AuthorMessage
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Fri May 09, 2008 9:18 pm

dude canada is full of illigal immigrant and we are not doing that bad. That illigal immigrant is a big crap. sorry to tell you that but building a wall with mexico ? that just silly. Because if someone want to enter a country they will find a way. And US is really hypocrite with illigant immigrant . Because if you add none right now your economy would collapse.In fact there are the modern type of slave for many employer.
soo stop to fool yourself and all occidental country got illigal immigrant and xenophoby take over some country like US.
Well i guess that a good set up for WW3 if all modern country get paranoid with immigrant.Because take everything from a man and he became a wild beast capable of everything. And all those poor country as left is hope.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Fri May 09, 2008 10:15 pm

While I do not doubt that Canada has an illegal immigrant problem, I do not think it is bad as ours. The U.S. has an estimated 20+ million illegal immigrants(that's about 2/3rds the population of Canada. Also saying that our economy would collapse because we stopped illegals from getting into this country is bull. It would force employers to hire employees who are paid normal wages instead of ultra low wages. There would no longer be a problem of legitimiate companies having to hire illegals just to keep up with the companies that are. Secondly these legally hired employees would have to pay taxes, which would give the government more money to use. I am not fooling myself. You are looking at this issue the wrong way, the America needs illegals arguement has so many holes in it it's not even a credible arguement. Sorry if I seem somewhat irritated but this is an issue that I am passionate about.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Fri May 09, 2008 11:52 pm

well firt you greatly over state the pop of illedal immigrant in U.S

Quote :
In March of 2006 the Pew Hispanic Center (PHC) estimated the undocumented population ranged from 11.5 to 12 million individuals[47], a number supported by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO)[48]. Using data from March of 2004, PHC estimated[49]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_immigration_debate

and they evaluate the growth rate is about half a million each year(in 2000)

soo it more like 12.5 to 13 million illegal immigrant in 2008
Quote :
On October 17, 2006, the United States population was estimated by the U.S. Census Bureau to be 300,000,000.[119] The U.S. population included an estimated 12 million unauthorized migrants
Quote :
Population
- 2008 estimate304,035,000[2] (3rd4)

soo it seeing very unlikely to have to growth that fast past few year. Since ther overall population only growth of 4 million in these two year i cant believe of that growth 1 million would by illegal.+Because of the war in Irak and the major crash with credit , There probly not as many as it use to by who want to join a dying super power.

soo let base the % on 2006. Soo about 0.4% of the total pop is illegal

Quote :
It would force employers to hire employees who are paid normal wages instead of ultra low wages

well my friend you have really little knowleged of economy . Because yo uare not force to make something somewhere if it cost less somewhere else like in china. So no even if you success in removing all those immigrant this would cause a crash. Since those ''slave'' cant by replace that easily since legal worker are too expensive and worse they cant fight back if you push too faar the abuse during the work.

jsut read a little bit on internationnal ducument about illegal immigrant in US and you will see they all say the same thing. Politician use it to make easy capita for the next election but wont make upper move to stop illegal immigrant since they are vital.

btw just another notion you should really learn

company tax>worker tax

and thsoe illegal immigrant pay indirect tax since they have to purchase stuff to live where they working.
whitout those the same company would have by gone long time ago with the (i dont know how yo ucall it in english) gobalisation(the fact that you can purchase anything from anywhere in the world)

dont listen to politician speech or Fox or you are going to by fool by them
Back to top Go down
Hold the Hek
Legend.
avatar

Posts : 1000
Join date : 2008-03-16
Age : 32
Location : D-Town, Michigan

PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Fri May 09, 2008 11:56 pm

WTB Viking system of government.

~---~
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://aristocracy.user-board.net/
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Sat May 10, 2008 1:17 am

My only issue with illegal immigration is that it shits all over the people who waited years to do it legally, which is enough of a reason to put a stop to it. Anyone remember the "a day without immigration" protest? Life continued as normal, and it proved the point many people have been arguing... that illegal immigrants really don't contribute as much to the economy as they want you to believe. And oug, if they were legal, they would be paying much more in taxes... you know... about as much as people living here legally.


And you really cannot compare Canada's immigration situation with the U.S., that is neither here nor there. Apples and oranges.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Sat May 10, 2008 1:26 am

Also, call me a crazy conspiracy theorist.. but I really do see within the next few decades more and more support for a North American Union type of setup to compete with growing powers like China, India, and the EU. Whether it will be an EU type setup or the complete annexation of Canada, and possibly Mexico, I have no idea.

A Canadian man set up this site and makes some interesting points about the pros of a Canadian/American union. I know that won't settle well with some people, but it's an interesting read none the less.

http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Sat May 10, 2008 1:31 am

anthony that teh point they would ask for a bigger salery. Since they would have to pay taxe. That how it hurt the economy the company would move else where.

dude it probly going to by a union and canada will move before US. At least i know québec would ask ether EU or Sud america (because they are smarter them us and already form one)

the only bad thing about union is the money them to by to high for some country. Soo it only work if all the country got about the same weigth at the economic power.

some people speculated EU will imploded in about 20-30 year since some country think euro is to high for there own use and hurt there own economy

personally i wouldnt mind since i know that mean québec will vote to get away from canada Razz in fer to by assimilated


btw dont double post edit Razz
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Sat May 10, 2008 1:50 am

The only union possible for Quebec would be one on the continent. Also, I think you have a rather grim and somewhat prejudiced view as to what America is. Canada is already indirectly influenced by American policy, if Canada was part of the U.S., that would give Canadians voting rights in the largest economy in the world. Canadian/Americans are generally the same people with nearly identical cultures, even the Canadian constitution is modeled after the U.S. one. It's really just an artificial border drawn by the British. The differences we DO have are largely regional differences... as someone from Washington, I share much more in common with British columbians then Texans, and people in Ontario probably share more in common with new englanders then they do with Albertans. Also, can you imagine what would have happened in the 2000/2004 elections if there were 9 more blue states? We spend billions of dollars a year protecting ourselves from eachother... and it makes no damned sense. We're already eachother's largest trading partners, can you imagine what we would save on import tax?

Just something to think about, if you drop your nationalist inhibitions, and think about it, it doesn't sound so bad.


Also, to get back on topic, here is a link comparing and contrasting both systems of governance.

http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/democracy.htm
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Sat May 10, 2008 3:14 am

LoL

nahh personally i dont give a crap about if we join or not US. But union can only work if there is more them one player and you wont seeing many canadian or quebecer prout to say yes to such union. Since province like alberta would get there oil profit get away from them. Soo yo uare the one having little knowleged of general canadian pride. Soo many province woukld oppose such union for the fact they would lose power other because of culture and that pretty much all atlantique province . Trust me you dont want to mess around with New Foundland people.
It make sense to you because you dont know canada but there is a big difference between canada and us.
a easy example who do you think create health care in canada ? it alberta. Do you think texas would do the same ? lol.
and yo uwant to know witch part of ours contitution who make us different
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms
in witch btw québec got backstab and never sigh.
want i read your text i see exactly why it impossible you dont even understand or EU union work. Canada would never accept to become part of US. At least not in one piece.
Soo dont use big word want you dont understand people pride in being independant... how ironic. i guess US is not what is use to by.

and btw a american union you cant forget about south america central and mexique.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Sat May 10, 2008 3:47 am

Ouglouk wrote:
LoL

nahh personally i dont give a crap about if we join or not US. But union can only work if there is more them one player and you wont seeing many canadian or quebecer prout to say yes to such union.

No argument there. The biggest obstacle is definately Canadian nationalism. Not many would be in favor of it..... yet.

Ouglouk wrote:
LoL
It make sense to you because you dont know canada but there is a big difference between canada and us.
a easy example who do you think create health care in canada ? it alberta. Do you think texas would do the same ? lol.
and yo uwant to know witch part of ours contitution who make us different

In the U.S., healthcare is regaurded as a state issue. Canada could keep universal healthcare if it chose. To quote the site "In 2002 the people of the state of Oregon proposed a referenda to decide on enacting a universal healthcare system, which if enacted would have seen the state provide health care for every resident. Although the measure lost a state-wide vote 79% to 21%, this example serves as a clear example for Canadian states that wish to retain universal health care." I should also note there are Canadian provinces, such as B.C., who are moving towards a more privatized system.... which just re-affirms my point that our differences (small they are) are largely regional, and not national.


I really can't say much to counter the rest of your post, as it's mostly your opinion, and I respect it. It's a scary thought, even as an American. I will however ask you to read this link on Canadian nationalism, it may change your opinion on how different we really are, it may not.

http://www.unitednorthamerica.org/nationalism.htm

Alot of your objections to this idea seem to largely revolve around the economy... to steal another quote from the site...

"It is well known that the US has had the strongest economy in the world since the post WWII era. Comparatively, the US has more than double the GDP of the second highest ranked country, Japan, which is just over 4.6 trillion.15 However, the statistic that really shows how well a country is doing comparative to their population is the GDP per capita figure. In this category, the US lists within the top ten countries of the world. It outperforms Canada by nearly 18%, and China, the 4th largest world economy, by 24.7 times. the US posted a much better GDP growth rate, but over the long term both Canada and the US are growing at very comparable rates. Economics is obviously a complicated area and there are many factors to consider, but one major factor that helps the US maintain its strength in the global economy and in comparison to Canada in particular, is its large domestic market. Interestingly, if the European Union is counted as a nation, it would have a larger GDP than the United States, but Canada and the United States combined would make the world's largest economy."




Anyway, again, sorry for steering the thread off topic, it's just an idea I've been following for a couple years and I guess it's sorta relevent.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Sat May 10, 2008 12:20 pm

You dont see many difference between canada and us right now because it a conservator who got the power. But normal canada is much more centris. Dont forget US and Canada were in war two time,. And both time canada push back us and burn the white house we care for our independency.And since each province can disjoint from canada it highly impossible canada would join US. Because the risk is too high canada would just broke up.Soo forget about canada becoming part of US but a union like europe is possible.
but there still a big problem what currency are we going to take/create . That why it mostly impossible US would never drop there currency for a new one.
But i dont get why you dont speka about south america central america and mexico ? all of thsoe are part of the continent. and in the long run we will have to do deal with them.

and about your link Québec is not like other place ask europeen or anyone who already come here . We are a hybrid of north america thinking and europe. Not onyl québec but most antlantic province have a strong sense of nationalist since they are from people who were push over(Acadiant) ,myself im part of it. Like they say blood is sticker them water.
and i have to disagred too on many point yes other canadian speak teh same language but i dont think they think like like US. there is many example: The right to have a gun. In canada we dont see the point on having a none hunting gun charge and ready to kill.Normally we care about environnement(damn conservator and the weak opposition).The respect of other culture is much more developpe in canada.
We are not racist like US is. All that big fuss abot black and white and equal between man and women . That alway funny want i watch tv show of us you never see soo many black and white people together.most of the time they are all black/white or white one dude witch is the opposite but still a good buddy.
and that just plain silly some part say canada is weak... wtf we dont like to fight but if we mess with us we fight back and hit hard. Just learn your historuy go on the web and look for normandie drop it was mostly canadian in it. the thing canada did understand and US dint it the best defence is not attacking another country but diplomacy.
overall this article is writte by a US guy for US guy. There is not fact just opinion
a quick example
they say only two province permit gay marriage there some fact
Quote :
2000s


In April 2000, the federal Liberal government responded to the 1999
Supreme Court decision by passing a bill (C-23) which amended 68
federal statutes, including pension benefits, bankruptcy protection,
income taxes, old age security, and immigration, among others, to grant
equal rights to homosexual common-law couples.[2]
In 2000, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled that gay publications,
even those that were sexually explicit were protected by the freedom of
speech and expression clauses in the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms. This ended a common police practice of seizing gay
publications for being obscene.
In 2001, NDP MP Libby Davies
publicly acknowledged she had a female partner, becoming the country's
first (and so far only) openly lesbian Member of Parliament.
In 2002, sexual orientation and gender identity were included in the Northwest Territories Human Rights Act.
In 2003, the British Columbia Court of Appeal made a unanimous
decision that limiting the definition of marriage to heterosexual
couples violated equality rights. The ruling was not effective
immediately, but allowed a two year transition period for Ottawa to
legally recognize same-sex marriage.[2] In June, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld the decision of a lower court to allow same-sex marriage.
In May 2004, the House of Commons and the Senate passed Bill C-250,
which added "sexual orientation" to the "hate propaganda" section of
the Criminal Code, thus making it illegal for people to propagate hate based on sexual orientation. This did not include clergymen however.
In July 2004, Scott Brison, who had previously run for the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada was appointed Minister of Public Works and Government Services by Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin, becoming Canada's first openly gay cabinet member.
In December 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada replied to the federal
government's draft legislation that would legalize gay marriage
nationwide. The Court ruled that the federal government has the
exclusive authority to define marriage, that same-sex marriage was
constitutional and was far from violating it, in fact "it flowed from"
it, and that religious officials can't be forced to perform gay
weddings. The Court refused to answer whether or not the traditional
definition of marriage was consistent with the Charter.
On June 28th, 2005, by a vote of 158-133, the House of Commons
passed Bill C-38, the Civil Marriage Act and on July 19th, 2005, by a
vote of 47-21, the Senate gave its approval to the bill.
On July 20th, 2005, C-38 received royal assent from Chief Justice of
The Supreme Court of Canada, Beverley McLachlin, acting in her role as
deputy governor general. Canada became the fourth country to officially
sanction gay marriage nationwide, behind Belgium, The Netherlands, and
Spain. Same-sex marriages began in Ontario and British Columbia in
2003, with other provinces following via court challenges. The Ontario
Court of Appeal ordered a religious same-sex marriage that was
performed in January 2001 legally valid, thus retroactively making it
the first legal same-sex in modern times (as The Netherlands did not
legalize same-sex marriage until April 2001).
As of 2005, all provinces (except Alberta) and territories had included "sexual orientation" in their human rights laws, and the Northwest Territories
include "gender identity" in theirs. While the Alberta law had still
not been amended in 2005, the Supreme Court of Canada had decided in
the Vriend v. Alberta case in 1998 that section 15 of the Canadian Charter required that the Alberta law be read and applied as if the words "sexual orientation" were included.
In 2006, the International Conference on LGBT Human Rights was held in Montreal, culminating with the issuance of the Declaration of Montreal. The Borough of Ville-Marie in Montreal soon became the first government in the world to adopt the declaration, and the New Democratic Party became the first political formation in the world to do so at its convention in September.

that link as nothing interresting dont believe such conjecture

sorry but such text just make me mad. saying we are the same wow ....
just look there soo manu spanish in US and you dont even consider them or how you threat all teh arabic people. that sad
Back to top Go down
Anno
Token Aussie.
avatar

Posts : 37
Join date : 2008-05-14

PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Wed May 14, 2008 11:06 pm

I voted other.

America and canada... one is run badly by an idiot... the other is full of french people.

Australia imo.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   Thu May 15, 2008 12:10 am

damn you lol
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside   

Back to top Go down
 
WARNING! possible intellectual talk inside
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2
 Similar topics
-
» Adam Fenix (SPOILER WARNING)
» Stuck in Ventrue Tower error spams WARNING:msg overflow with Sethic
» Inside the Chess Mind
» Let's talk about australians
» Favourite places to talk about games online.

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
 :: Intra-Guild Functions. :: General Discussion.-
Jump to: