Quebec bashing

24 posts / 0 new
Last post
Lefauve
Quebec bashing

Put a word that is linked to quebec on any Anglo new site or news paper (except rabble and most of the progressive one) and read the comment, (sensible people mighty get shocked). If you feel angry, don't worry, it normal. In the past sixty year we fight racisme around the clock with improving result, but for francophobia and quebecphobia the result are very little, i can even dare to say that the last 15 year are even deggrading. Just trying to argue with the is near imposible. You can't give them any verified fact. They stick to there illogical and unverified argument. Now, i will say it, a big taboo: Racist and bigot are the worst type of idiots. Ahh feel better! For the other guy who speak english and show fairness and open mind in there comment, don't worry i still like you.

WillC

If you judge anglophones by what appears on a newspaper site comments, then I think you're basing it on a faulty population. I think there is a group of bigots who have bored and offended most of their aquaintances, and so must post anonymously in a place where the audience can't cross the street when they see them coming.

 

Lefauve

WillC

Sorry i offended you, i will reasure you that i beleive, that most of you are quite ok, but unfortunaly,(and that it why it infuriate me) they are people who make there opinion according to those comment.

In a competition between logic and gregarian instinct

gregarian instinct win.

But we can use gregarian instinct at our avantage. Be more present in number in those forum.

Lefauve

Merci, Anonymouse!

J'invite toute fois de bien vérifier les traductions googles, les traducteurs automatiques font souvent des erreurs pour les expressions. C'est pourquoi j'encourage d'écrire dans leur langue maternel s'il ne sont pas sur de la façon d'écrire leur idée dans leur langue seconde. Dans certain cas complexe les traducteurs automatique peuvent trahir l'idée du texte.

Thank you Anonymouse!

I invide people to double check there text when using automatic translation software. The translation software are often doing mistake with some expression. It is why i strongly recomande the use of your first language if you are unsure on how to translate a sentence in there second language. In complex text the automatic translator can betrail the main idea of you text.

Roscoe

Lefauve wrote:
WillC Sorry i offended you, i will reasure you that i beleive, that most of you are quite ok, but unfortunaly,(and that it why it infuriate me) they are people who make there opinion according to those comment. In a competition between logic and gregarian instinct gregarian instinct win. But we can use gregarian instinct at our avantage. Be more present in number in those forum.

Lefavre, I think most of you are quite ok too. I also think that the people of Quebec made their feelings known about sovereignty in the last election. When Gilles Duceppe embraced a PQ policy of more emphatic effort at independence than Pauline thought prudent, the people of Quebec immediately handed M. Duceppe a resounding federal electoral defeat, going so far as to hand the NDP a total victory.

How sovereigntists can translate this event into support for sovereignty is illogical. Most Quebeckers do not embrace sovereignty and the sovereigntist movement has shown itself to be a vehicle of advancement for self-interested individuals.

Unionist

Roscoe, if I thought your analysis were serious and sincere, I'd say it was incredibly dumb. Under the circumstances, however, I will not say that. I would simply invite others to not engage in a pissing match with an adversary who is full of such weaponry.

 

WillC

Lefauve wrote:
WillC Sorry i offended you, i will reasure you that i beleive, that most of you are quite ok, but unfortunaly,(and that it why it infuriate me) they are people who make there opinion according to those comment. In a competition between logic and gregarian instinct gregarian instinct win. But we can use gregarian instinct at our avantage. Be more present in number in those forum.

I must have been quite awkward in my writing because you didn't offend me at all. I was just feeling it must have been unpleasant for you thinking that the majority of people living around your province or nation, separated or not, has a hostile attitude towards you.

It's not a phrase I've ever read before, but after looking it up in English and Frech, and associating it with gregarious, I think that 'gregarian instinct" means the instinct to draw together with what you consider your group.  Many of us in Canada, even unilinguals,  consider that our group, the one we identify with,  is our bilingual country.

 

 

Lefauve

Thank you for your post Roscoe

I don't think Ndp was elected by logic but rather by emotion. It more like a try out, like giving a chance to federalism see if it
can work and also to break the what was looking to be a vicious circle of ever lasting opposition. Add a really good campaign from then ndp and we got the orange wave. But at the same time we got harper who's the exact oposite of quebec value, The harper election with a majority give a national wide "where screwed" feeling. It is why the sovreingty support is rising to 43%.

As for Sovreignist to be centrist, i think is quite normal, because i observe the same phenomena in the other province and also it reflect how reality of each province is different. Just look on the economy each province got a different type of economy and different type of leading industries. Personnaly competitions between province in normal and it not in itself bad, in the sixty at the beginning of the education quebec was dead last, the electrochoc of that fact trigger a huge educationnal reform. And now quebec is no longer dead last, but still fighting to keep it place and get better. But for the matter of funding, it get really ugly. The transfert paiement file. Or how to give the fair share to each province. the problem is the word fair which lead as many intepretation as they are canadian. (i leave that question for an other post!)

For the sovreignty matter, i will give you the best answer that will expresse both my feeling. Like i said, canadian are different, the problem nobody can't rule ourself better that ourself. Even if it with the best intention in the world will end up messing everything up. The Duram report was written with the best intention in the world, but still recommand the instinction of the canadian(today quebecer) culture and assimilation.

Autodetermination is alway the best thing for all nations,

And beside even with a sovreign quebec all canadian who want to go in quebec will be able to do just as usual. It not like we gonna put fence or something like that. For the daily life it buisness as usual. Sure the law will be a bit different but still familiar.

wage zombie

Beinvenue Lefauve :)

Lefauve

 


petit comic ;)

 

Anonymouse

Les Québecois et francophones sont bienvenues ici. Vous êtes aussi bienvenue à écrire des comentaires dans la langue de votre choix. Il y a plusiers membres de rabble qui sont fonctionellement bilingues et suivent des médias francophones. Nous faisons l'effort parfois de traduire des extraits d'articles français en anglais pour des babble-ois unilingues, pour que tous soient informées. Des autres fois, les gens utilisent google pour faire leurs traductions.

Roscoe

Unionist wrote:

Roscoe, if I thought your analysis were serious and sincere, I'd say it was incredibly dumb. Under the circumstances, however, I will not say that. I would simply invite others to not engage in a pissing match with an adversary who is full of such weaponry.

 

Thank you for your not saying that after saying it.Smile  Very kind of you to spare my sensibilities from personal attack, and, especially sparing my comments from any critical analysis by defecting it into criticism of what you define as "an adversary".

Obvious by its omission but telling by way of not saying what you didn't say is the fact that my humble missive obviously hit a nerve. Sovereignty is a none-issue with those who are not part of the 76% of 43% who think it is. Thats 32.68%.

It is very difficult to paint the fence while sitting upon it but you appear to do quite well. Your physical contortions must be inspired by your obvious political dexterity. Your last comment on the subject of Quebec in regard to your humble servant was about my having the nerve, the gall, if you will, to state that I didn't pay much attention to Quebec at all.

My analysis is serious and sincere. It may be ill-informed and probably less than nuanced but its the best that this westerner who has never been to Quebec can do. I'll try to do better after reading more responses.

Suggesting that others not respond to posts you don't like is a rather arrogant assuption that 'others' are not sufficiently bright enough to share your superior insight isn't it?  Others might say you attempt to stifle open discourse but I didn't say they might say that either.Laughing

Roscoe

Lefauve wrote:
Thank you for your post Roscoe I don't think Ndp was elected by logic but rather by emotion. It more like a try out, like giving a chance to federalism see if it can work and also to break the what was looking to be a vicious circle of ever lasting opposition. Add a really good campaign from then ndp and we got the orange wave. But at the same time we got harper who's the exact oposite of quebec value, The harper election with a majority give a national wide "where screwed" feeling. It is why the sovreingty support is rising to 43%. As for Sovreignist to be centrist, i think is quite normal, because i observe the same phenomena in the other province and also it reflect how reality of each province is different. Just look on the economy each province got a different type of economy and different type of leading industries. Personnaly competitions between province in normal and it not in itself bad, in the sixty at the beginning of the education quebec was dead last, the electrochoc of that fact trigger a huge educationnal reform. And now quebec is no longer dead last, but still fighting to keep it place and get better. But for the matter of funding, it get really ugly. The transfert paiement file. Or how to give the fair share to each province. the problem is the word fair which lead as many intepretation as they are canadian. (i leave that question for an other post!) For the sovreignty matter, i will give you the best answer that will expresse both my feeling. Like i said, canadian are different, the problem nobody can't rule ourself better that ourself. Even if it with the best intention in the world will end up messing everything up. The Duram report was written with the best intention in the world, but still recommand the instinction of the canadian(today quebecer) culture and assimilation. Autodetermination is alway the best thing for all nations, And beside even with a sovreign quebec all canadian who want to go in quebec will be able to do just as usual. It not like we gonna put fence or something like that. For the daily life it buisness as usual. Sure the law will be a bit different but still familiar.

What you say can also be true of other regions of Canada. The west especially has felt left out of Canada by previous Liberal governments. When one looks at the internal trade restrictions in Canada, we all lose. Personally, I think Quebec stands to gain more from an improved version of Canada that includes Quebec but if the people of Quebec wish to chose independence, so be it.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Roscoe wrote:
 Personally, I think Quebec stands to gain more from an improved version of Canada that includes Quebec but if the people of Quebec wish to chose independence, so be it.

I've yet to see this improved version of Canada that you talk about, and I don't expect things to improve under a Conservative majority government. I actually expect a more socially regressive, much more corporatist, war-mongering Canada to emerge under Harper's stewardship - further alienating Quebec from the ROC.

Unionist

Roscoe wrote:
I also think that the people of Quebec made their feelings known about sovereignty in the last election.

Yeah, I think the people of Alberta made their feelings about Renaissance sculpture abundantly clear during the latest Calgary Stampede.

Quote:
When Gilles Duceppe embraced a PQ policy of more emphatic effort at independence than Pauline thought prudent, the people of Quebec immediately handed M. Duceppe a resounding federal electoral defeat, going so far as to hand the NDP a total victory.

True. And when Ed Stelmach broke with long-standing tradition by openly championing Leibnitz, and not Newton, as the progenitor of the differential calculus, he was instantly ostracized by the OECD. Can we really blame them? Do the math.

Quote:
How sovereigntists can translate this event into support for sovereignty is illogical.

I've never visited Nepal, but how the Nepalese can simply wave their hands and make climate change disappear boggles the Himalayas.

Quote:
Most Quebeckers do not embrace sovereignty and the sovereigntist movement has shown itself to be a vehicle of advancement for self-interested individuals.

True enough. Duceppe's personal fortune has long since outstripped that of the Desmarais and the Peladeaus. How he manages to keep this a secret is anyone's guess, but stay tuned for a Wikileaks revelation coming to your gossip column soon.

There - hopefully I've brought this discussion to the appropriate level. As I say, never having visited Nepal, I may be wrong on some of the details, but I demand that everyone engage me respectfully on the free expression of my frivolously held opinions. Now, preferably.

 

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Roscoe wrote:

When one looks at the internal trade restrictions in Canada, we all lose. 

You sure do come up with right wing talking points.  This is a BC Liberal hobby horse that they and the Alberta Tories are promoting.  Like all "trade"agreements it is a threat to public delivery of services and it transfers power to corporations.

6079_Smith_W

Roscoe wrote:
 I also think that the people of Quebec made their feelings known about sovereignty in the last election.

Hey I think Stephen Harper said something like that - the only consultation we needed to do we did on election day - after the last election when somebody complained about something he wanted to do.

It took Andy Coyne a couple of weeks after this election before he realized that the ability to form a federal majority government without Quebec, and an even thinner and more strained connection between Quebec and the (highly vindictive and right-wing) Harper government is not necessarily a good thing for federalism.

Not to mention that it frees up all the energy and resources in the bloc to go to work in the provincial arena - where it really counts. 

I don't think Rex Murphy has noticed yet. Just wait till this situation percolates awhile.

 

Roscoe

Northern Shoveler wrote:

Roscoe wrote:

When one looks at the internal trade restrictions in Canada, we all lose. 

You sure do come up with right wing talking points.  This is a BC Liberal hobby horse that they and the Alberta Tories are promoting.  Like all "trade"agreements it is a threat to public delivery of services and it transfers power to corporations.

Anything that isn't within the confines of your dogma is obviously "right wing talking points" so there is a great deal of room for logical commentary that you will not agree with. How does forcing residents to accept infated prices from marketing boards threaten public delivery of services?

The "hobby horse" is not a "trade agreement" but an informed opinion is obviously beyond reach for the ideologically pure.

Roscoe

Boom Boom wrote:

Roscoe wrote:
 Personally, I think Quebec stands to gain more from an improved version of Canada that includes Quebec but if the people of Quebec wish to chose independence, so be it.

I've yet to see this improved version of Canada that you talk about, and I don't expect things to improve under a Conservative majority government. I actually expect a more socially regressive, much more corporatist, war-mongering Canada to emerge under Harper's stewardship - further alienating Quebec from the ROC.

No but on the other hand, we have yet to see a separation referendum pass so, hope springs eternal.

Roscoe

Unionist wrote:

Roscoe wrote:
I also think that the people of Quebec made their feelings known about sovereignty in the last election.

Yeah, I think the people of Alberta made their feelings about Renaissance sculpture abundantly clear during the latest Calgary Stampede.

Quote:
When Gilles Duceppe embraced a PQ policy of more emphatic effort at independence than Pauline thought prudent, the people of Quebec immediately handed M. Duceppe a resounding federal electoral defeat, going so far as to hand the NDP a total victory.

True. And when Ed Stelmach broke with long-standing tradition by openly championing Leibnitz, and not Newton, as the progenitor of the differential calculus, he was instantly ostracized by the OECD. Can we really blame them? Do the math.

Quote:
How sovereigntists can translate this event into support for sovereignty is illogical.

I've never visited Nepal, but how the Nepalese can simply wave their hands and make climate change disappear boggles the Himalayas.

Quote:
Most Quebeckers do not embrace sovereignty and the sovereigntist movement has shown itself to be a vehicle of advancement for self-interested individuals.

True enough. Duceppe's personal fortune has long since outstripped that of the Desmarais and the Peladeaus. How he manages to keep this a secret is anyone's guess, but stay tuned for a Wikileaks revelation coming to your gossip column soon.

There - hopefully I've brought this discussion to the appropriate level. As I say, never having visited Nepal, I may be wrong on some of the details, but I demand that everyone engage me respectfully on the free expression of my frivolously held opinions. Now, preferably.

 

Yeah, you are always demanding something from others. Sometimes at the same time as you are telling others they are too stupid to think for themdselves and should trust your much superior powers of reasoning to tell them what their opinon is.

I wonder if the Quebec electorate rebelled at this arrogant attitude from the separatists and chose to elect neophyte NDP placeholders to teach the arrogantistas a lesson.   Laughing

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Roscoe wrote:

Anything that isn't within the confines of your dogma is obviously "right wing talking points" so there is a great deal of room for logical commentary that you will not agree with. How does forcing residents to accept infated prices from marketing boards threaten public delivery of services?

Fuck you caught me out in my far out dogma.  

Money mouth

Wow imagine me having the audacity to call ideas promoted by the Business Counsel and the Fraser Institute "right wing talking points."  I prefer to get my facts and information from the CCPA.  I get it that to you the CCPA is dogma.  What I don't get is why you are here harassing people who don't buy into the crap sold at the idea markets you seem to get all your cheap intellectual junk from.  Dismantling local government in the name of efficiency is a corporate wet dream and a public service nightmare. 

Quote:

TILMA is primarily a cut and paste job drawing on the most extreme provisions of a variety of trade regimes - the WTO, NAFTA, and Canada’s Agreement on Internal Trade - and combining them for maximum effect. The agreement is essentially a long list of things governments will be prohibited from doing, for all time, regardless of who gets elected provincially or at the local government level.

Under TILMA, no BC or Alberta government can ever provide support for rural or small business development. They are prohibited from engaging in regional economic development, unless there are

“exceptional circumstances” and even then the assistance cannot “distort investment decisions”. They will be forever barred from introducing standards or regulations that “restrict or impair” investment (and what regulation could not be seen as a restriction on investment?) Regulations will have to be reconciled between the two provinces. Or worse, governments will have to “mutually recognize” each others standards and regulations, whether or not these are lower. Preferences in government procurement for locally produced goods and services will

be essentially banned, because purchases of as little as $10,000 made by any level of government, right down to school boards, will have to be opened up to contractors from across the provincial border. Exceptions to the agreement - including forestry and fishery management - will be subjected to annual reviews for the purpose of “reducing their scope.”

Private investors will be empowered to enforce the agreement by taking their complaints to dispute panels, whose decisions will be binding. TILMA goes much further than NAFTA’s Chapter 11 in creating grounds for private law suits againstFAST FACTS continued ...

government regulation. It limits awards for compensation to $5 million, but since there are no limits on the number of challenges that can be taken about the same regulation, governments will either have to pay to regulate or eliminate the challenged regulation.

In an especially ironic twist given the lack of public consultation over the agreement, TILMA creates a binding obligation for each province to seek the opinion of the other province before they take any new initiative that might be covered by the agreement. Each province is required to take the comments of the other province into consideration before any such initiative is taken. TILMA consequently creates greater rights for non-residents of a province to be consulted and have their opinions considered than residents themselves enjoy.

 

 

 

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/publication...

Roscoe

What a load of hysterical nonsense.  The truth of the matter is that TILMA gives regional and municipal government the ability to seek bids from more than just local bidders.

 Far from "a threat to public delivery of services", TILMA gives the taxpayer a break by forcing bidders on public services such as engineering and construction contracts to actually compete for local business rather than the taxpayer being forced to accept higher prices.

Of course, you and the CCPA consider the taxpayer only as a cash cow, not an entity to unto itself. I don't think you can see past the hysterics of CCPAs biases but, for most smaller, non-urban regional and local government in BC, there are few options for professional assistance. The fees are usurious and the service sloppy. All you can see is private encroachment on garbage collection and dogcatching.

There is short term pain attached to eliminating inter-provincial trade barriers but at the same time, the market potential for small business is opened up by allowing them the same access big business has always enjoyed. Under TILMA, any small business from one jurisdiction can work in another under the corporate structure, WCB etc of its home jurisdiction without prejudice. A plumber from BC can bid jobs in Alberta and vicey-versy.

Getting back on topic, Quebec will benefit from such arrangements as will any other province. Interprovincial trade and investment barriers only benefit those who wish to create a captive market for their own benefit - like overpriced marketing board commodities that benefit inefficient farmers and the management pimps that control the boards.

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Roscoe thank you for confirming that you have nothing but right wing talking points.  You come on this site and preach BC Liberal nonsense as good public policy.  You even use terms like "pimps" to make your points.  I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that you believe that the views you spout are progressive but then I would be calling into question your intellect and reasoning skills.

I included a picture of the progressive liberal leader you seem to prefer channeling when it comes to public policy.

Quote:

In the midst of the financial meltdown, one man, apparently, stands alone calling for more deregulation. While anti-government George Bush buys up banks and insurance companies, former Fed chair Alan Greenspan admits he was "partially wrong" in his hands-off approach towards the banking industry, and the crisis has caused right-wing French President Sarkozy to virtually denounce capitalism.

Yet, while everyone else is demanding the rogue financial industry be brought to heel, B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell is actually pushing for even more financial deregulation right across the country.

That would seem to be the only logical interpretation of his call at the premiers' meeting in Montreal to get every province signed on to his pet project, the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement, or TILMA. Campbell claimed this would help counter the economic slowdown. But what TILMA does is make a broad range of government regulations vulnerable to challenge, including regulations over the financial sector.

How TILMA ties regulators' hands

Among other things, TILMA has a standstill clause so that any new regulations on financial services that got in the way of investment would be a violation, potentially subject to a $5 million penalty. Article 5(3) of TILMA states: "Parties shall not establish new standards or regulations that operate to restrict or impair trade, investment or labour mobility."

Existing financial regulations will also be open to challenges under TILMA if they restrict investment. And unlike other trade agreements, there is nothing in TILMA to exempt regulations designed to ensure the stability of the financial system. In stark contrast to other agreements, TILMA has no safeguards to protect prudential regulations from challenges by investors.

 

 

http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/11/03/TILMA/

 

6079_Smith_W

Roscoe wrote:

 The truth of the matter is that TILMA gives regional and municipal government the ability to seek bids from more than just local bidders.

You mean it FORCES them to. Great for the taxpayer? perhaps, unless that taxpayer happens to work in construction, or have a local business where any of those local workers spend their earnings. 

.... or the municipality which earns tax dollars off those local earnings which will evaporate if the market is forced open to big companies which can afford to slash their bids to undercut and kill small local business.

(edit)

"any small business" has the right to compete? 

What a laugh - like the rich have the right to eat out of garbage cans and sleep in alleys.