Don't spend your US Dollars in Canada !!!!!!

Freda

I don't have an idea where you are coming from, but you are full of ****.

Glen

Get over it loser. Work for 2008. That the way the system works.
Glen

Get over it loser. Work for 2008. That the way the system works.
Glen

Zane wrote:


You guys are starting to sound paranoid. If Bush has been "running
down" Canada, I sure haven't seen it in the press here. It seems to
me it's the other way around, with your _government officials_, for
Pete's sake, calling us "*******s" , "morons", etc.


She was a rather outspoken member of the government who was ousted from the party
over those statements.

Why on earth would we be paranoid when we are dealing with a hypocritical
government administration who has a record of ignoring its own advisors on
security matters and invading other countries over fabricated evidence and lies.

I would be the last to claim the U.S. doesn't ever engage in
"questionable" subsidies, but what I've read of the U.S. side of the
lumber issue _seems_ to have some merit. Before we try to argue the
details, let me give my opinion that no one on this board , including
me, knows enough to judge the merits of the dispute. There may be no
"right" position.

The political and economic agenda has been to remove trade barriers and encourage
competition. That is the agenda that has been pushed by successive American
administrations, but when US interests with powerful lobbies are affected, the US
government reacts with tariffs and subsidies. The softwood dispute is over our
stumpage fees. Some people think that we should be charging more for our natural
resources, but we have been able to sustain it, and to provide jobs in the
forestry business with lower stumpage fees. It had been suggested that the US
would drop the tariffs if we adopted their stumpage fee system.


(The U.S. _is_ pretty sensitive to dumping, having
been savaged by undeniable dumping from Japan for many years -- the
steel industry being one big example. The (in)famous Boston Tea Party
was actually motivated by British dumping (no pun intended) of tea in
the Colonies, not by taxes as most people think.)

Add that to the list of myths about the revolution. The truth of the matter is
that the "patriots" were mostly a bunch of wealthy land owners who financed gangs
of thugs to harass the opposition. The patriots were a small minority who bullied
people into joining their cause, and after the revolution more than 10% of the
population left.



does not. Why does Canada care what we do, unless it's the worry
expressed by some highly placed Europeans that some "debris" from
destroyed missiles heading for the U.S. might fall on Europe and cause
death or injury? (Talk about true and brave friends!)

You don't think that fallout from a nuclear shootout is a problem? No problem.
Let it fall down on yourselves.
Your missile defense program failed its big test last year. While there may be a
few people who have made their millions on lucrative contracts to develop the
system most of us are not interested in lining their pockets so that we can
militarize space and develop ever more dangerous weapons of mass destruction.

I suppose you are aware of the evils committed by
your "sainly" country. I refer, of course, to your past
and present treatment of native Indian peoples. I
am sure that the Cree and Mohawk tribes know exactly
what I am writing about: your government's racist seizure
of their lands for profit.
You are an ingorant slut.

Freda wrote:


Anyone would think ths the US killed nothing and was so saintly good.

wrote:
I suppose you are aware of the evils committed by
your "sainly" country. I refer, of course, to your past
and present treatment of native Indian peoples. I
am sure that the Cree and Mohawk tribes know exactly
what I am writing about: your government's racist seizure
of their lands for profit.
You are an ingorant slut.

You indeed are the igonrant one...the US's treatment of native people is
far worse than Canada's....but nothing compared to the native treatment of
other natives.

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:42:06 -0500, Dave Smith
wrote:

Zane wrote:


You guys are starting to sound paranoid. If Bush has been "running
down" Canada, I sure haven't seen it in the press here. It seems to
me it's the other way around, with your _government officials_, for
Pete's sake, calling us "*******s" , "morons", etc.


She was a rather outspoken member of the government who was ousted from the party
over those statements.

Not until she went on over the years she wasn't. The last round was
hardly the first time she shot her mouth off.


Why on earth would we be paranoid when we are dealing with a hypocritical
government administration who has a record of ignoring its own advisors on
security matters and invading other countries over fabricated evidence and lies.

You mean like the French who have invaded Africa over 30 times all
while never getting the UN's prior approval? Do you rant about them
as well?


I would be the last to claim the U.S. doesn't ever engage in
"questionable" subsidies, but what I've read of the U.S. side of the
lumber issue _seems_ to have some merit. Before we try to argue the
details, let me give my opinion that no one on this board , including
me, knows enough to judge the merits of the dispute. There may be no
"right" position.

The political and economic agenda has been to remove trade barriers and encourage
competition. That is the agenda that has been pushed by successive American
administrations, but when US interests with powerful lobbies are affected, the US
government reacts with tariffs and subsidies. The softwood dispute is over our
stumpage fees. Some people think that we should be charging more for our natural
resources, but we have been able to sustain it, and to provide jobs in the
forestry business with lower stumpage fees. It had been suggested that the US
would drop the tariffs if we adopted their stumpage fee system.

EVERY government does this to some extent. It hardly undercuts the
basic policy otherwise nothing would ever get done.



(The U.S. _is_ pretty sensitive to dumping, having
been savaged by undeniable dumping from Japan for many years -- the
steel industry being one big example. The (in)famous Boston Tea Party
was actually motivated by British dumping (no pun intended) of tea in
the Colonies, not by taxes as most people think.)

Add that to the list of myths about the revolution. The truth of the matter is
that the "patriots" were mostly a bunch of wealthy land owners who financed gangs
of thugs to harass the opposition. The patriots were a small minority who bullied
people into joining their cause, and after the revolution more than 10% of the
population left.

Which has little to nothing to do with the point, which was that the
US is pretty sensitive to dumping. Why don't you try staying on point
instead of trying to teach history?




does not. Why does Canada care what we do, unless it's the worry
expressed by some highly placed Europeans that some "debris" from
destroyed missiles heading for the U.S. might fall on Europe and cause
death or injury? (Talk about true and brave friends!)

You don't think that fallout from a nuclear shootout is a problem? No problem.
Let it fall down on yourselves.
Your missile defense program failed its big test last year. While there may be a
few people who have made their millions on lucrative contracts to develop the
system most of us are not interested in lining their pockets so that we can
militarize space and develop ever more dangerous weapons of mass destruction.


Then according to your august philosophy you would never try to
develop anything new because it might fail? Brilliant approach that.

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:42:06 -0500, Dave Smith
wrote:

Zane wrote:


You guys are starting to sound paranoid. If Bush has been "running
down" Canada, I sure haven't seen it in the press here. It seems to
me it's the other way around, with your _government officials_, for
Pete's sake, calling us "*******s" , "morons", etc.


She was a rather outspoken member of the government who was ousted from the party
over those statements.

Not until she went on over the years she wasn't. The last round was
hardly the first time she shot her mouth off.


Why on earth would we be paranoid when we are dealing with a hypocritical
government administration who has a record of ignoring its own advisors on
security matters and invading other countries over fabricated evidence and lies.

You mean like the French who have invaded Africa over 30 times all
while never getting the UN's prior approval? Do you rant about them
as well?


I would be the last to claim the U.S. doesn't ever engage in
"questionable" subsidies, but what I've read of the U.S. side of the
lumber issue _seems_ to have some merit. Before we try to argue the
details, let me give my opinion that no one on this board , including
me, knows enough to judge the merits of the dispute. There may be no
"right" position.

The political and economic agenda has been to remove trade barriers and encourage
competition. That is the agenda that has been pushed by successive American
administrations, but when US interests with powerful lobbies are affected, the US
government reacts with tariffs and subsidies. The softwood dispute is over our
stumpage fees. Some people think that we should be charging more for our natural
resources, but we have been able to sustain it, and to provide jobs in the
forestry business with lower stumpage fees. It had been suggested that the US
would drop the tariffs if we adopted their stumpage fee system.

EVERY government does this to some extent. It hardly undercuts the
basic policy otherwise nothing would ever get done.



(The U.S. _is_ pretty sensitive to dumping, having
been savaged by undeniable dumping from Japan for many years -- the
steel industry being one big example. The (in)famous Boston Tea Party
was actually motivated by British dumping (no pun intended) of tea in
the Colonies, not by taxes as most people think.)

Add that to the list of myths about the revolution. The truth of the matter is
that the "patriots" were mostly a bunch of wealthy land owners who financed gangs
of thugs to harass the opposition. The patriots were a small minority who bullied
people into joining their cause, and after the revolution more than 10% of the
population left.

Which has little to nothing to do with the point, which was that the
US is pretty sensitive to dumping. Why don't you try staying on point
instead of trying to teach history?




does not. Why does Canada care what we do, unless it's the worry
expressed by some highly placed Europeans that some "debris" from
destroyed missiles heading for the U.S. might fall on Europe and cause
death or injury? (Talk about true and brave friends!)

You don't think that fallout from a nuclear shootout is a problem? No problem.
Let it fall down on yourselves.
Your missile defense program failed its big test last year. While there may be a
few people who have made their millions on lucrative contracts to develop the
system most of us are not interested in lining their pockets so that we can
militarize space and develop ever more dangerous weapons of mass destruction.


Then according to your august philosophy you would never try to
develop anything new because it might fail? Brilliant approach that.

On 23 Dec 2004 15:09:15 GMT, (gman99) wrote:

wrote:
I suppose you are aware of the evils committed by
your "sainly" country. I refer, of course, to your past
and present treatment of native Indian peoples. I
am sure that the Cree and Mohawk tribes know exactly
what I am writing about: your government's racist seizure
of their lands for profit.
You are an ingorant slut.

You indeed are the igonrant one...the US's treatment of native people is
far worse than Canada's....but nothing compared to the native treatment of
other natives.


Only because Canada is so frigging cold that no one other than WASPs
and Frogs would ever live there. Even 80% of them have enough sense
to live within 100 miles of the US-Canadian border. Why would anyone
try to wrest away the frozen artic from anyone?

On 23 Dec 2004 15:09:15 GMT, (gman99) wrote:

wrote:
I suppose you are aware of the evils committed by
your "sainly" country. I refer, of course, to your past
and present treatment of native Indian peoples. I
am sure that the Cree and Mohawk tribes know exactly
what I am writing about: your government's racist seizure
of their lands for profit.
You are an ingorant slut.

You indeed are the igonrant one...the US's treatment of native people is
far worse than Canada's....but nothing compared to the native treatment of
other natives.


Only because Canada is so frigging cold that no one other than WASPs
and Frogs would ever live there. Even 80% of them have enough sense
to live within 100 miles of the US-Canadian border. Why would anyone
try to wrest away the frozen artic from anyone?