HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ray@philmtl.philips.ca (Ray Dunn)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: canadian subway
Date: 10 Jan 93 23:54:30 GMT
Organization: Not Philips.

As several people have already responded, yes, it's Montreal that has the
rubber tyred metro system.

The technically slanted may be interested to know that in fact each of the
rubber tyred wheels is actually backed by a regular steel railway wheel and
the track has normal steel rails in addition to the pads on which the tyres
run.  There is normally no steel-on-steel contact of course, it is required
only as a safety measure in case of a flat tyre.

It is unfortunate that the major extension to the system that is being
considered (a northern east-west line) will probably be steel-on-steel
technology because the government is reluctant to continue funding a system
(by Bombardier) which has so little potential for sales elsewhere, both
because it is more expensive, and because existing systems are nearly all
steel-on-steel.

Although the system to my mind is superb (even though it has a pretty small
coverage of the city), one of the disadvantages of the rubber tyres is
that they are totally unsuited to surface use in Montreal's climate, and
thus extension into the suburbs on the surface is exteremely unlikely.

It only costs $1.08 to travel from anywhere, to anywhere on the island of
Montreal, with as many transfers as required (but only one part of the
journey can be by metro unfortunately, all others by bus).  On boarding a
bus, a transfer is obtained which can be used for access within 90 minutes
to any other connecting bus or the metro.  When entering the metro station
another transfer is obtained which is good for another 90 minutes, to be
used for busses after leaving the metro.

I know of no other city that you can board a bus, do your business at the
other end, and _return_ home on the same fare (other than by buying a
return or two-way ticket of course), and who can imagine a 50 kilometer
journey in, say, London, for 60 pence?
-- 
Ray Dunn at home        |  Beaconsfield, Quebec  |  Phone: (514) 630 3749
ray@philmtl.philips.ca  |  ray@cam.org           |  uunet!sobeco!philmtl!ray
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: bross@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Brian J Ross)
Subject: Re: Unique, eh?
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Brock University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Distribution: world 
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:12:07 GMT

bob1@cos.com (Bob Blackshaw) writes:
: In <1993Jan11.034008.2994@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA> bross@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Brian J Ross) writes:
: >Canada is boring; Larry Godfrey is interesting!
: 
: Not really, in fact one wonders when it will dawn on him that he
: might be the problem. Laurence can't seem to get along with
: anyone in the world, but it is the world that is at fault in
: his never humble opinion.

Perhaps if everyone pries hard enough to get him to admit that he
was fired from the NRC, we'll break the cycle of denial which is
probably at the root of his emotional dysfunction. In any case , it's great
fun watching him take his little tantrums.  (Another possibility is that 
he isn't getting his regular professional spankings, but let's not get 
into that...) 

-- 
Brian Ross                          
bross@sandcastle.cosc.brocku.ca            
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: iyer@juju.wpd.sgi.com (Mahadevan Iyer)
Subject: Graduate Study
Keywords: Graduate Study
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 93 19:28:29 GMT

Hi everybody,
		Happy New Year

I am looking for info on Universities & professors in Canada who work
in the field of transportation engineering. If you have any ideas as to
where I could find this info ( news groups, ftp sites etc) please let
me know

Thank You
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: 500 New Jobs Per Day
Keywords: recession, jobs
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 03:54:37 GMT

In article <carlos.726803398@morgan> carlos@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Miguel Borges) writes:
>sitomlin@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Stephen I. Tomlinson) writes:
>>Statistics Canada reports that Canada's seasonally adjusted employment 
>                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>rose by 102,000 jobs in the last five months of 1992.  That's a pace
>>exceeding 500 new jobs per day.
>
>"Seasonally adjusted" - What a great term.
>
>It means that the new unemployment rate does not count those who are
>unemployed now and were unemployed at the same time last year.
>
>So, if you're jobless, but were jobless last January, then the government
>does not consider you "unemployed".  Even if you do receive UI.
>
>If applied to Newfoundland, for example, the "seasonally un-adjusted"
>unemployment rate would probably be as high as 50 or 60%.
>
>I love statistics.  And the way they are used to hide the truth from us.

yeah. i stopped even listening to these foolish numbers a couple of
years ago. they mean virtually *nothing*.

>Miguel - one of the few employed Newfs.

are things really that bad? (50% or 60% unemployed?) i never
get a chance to talk to people from Nfld. tell us a bit about what
life is like there, and also the employment/unemployment situation
and how people get by.

--
charles
From: maj@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Working permit for Canada?
Date: 13 Jan 93 11:49:08 +1300
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <1993Jan12.000921.20361@philmtl.philips.ca>, ray@philmtl.philips.ca (Ray Dunn) writes:
> In refd article, zxmsu01@studserv.zdv.uni-tuebingen.de (Joost Schuur) writes:
>> My question is,
>>what requirements are there for a foreigner to get a working permit/visa
>>in your country. Do I have to prove I have a certain amount of money
>>when I enter the country or present a return ticket? Can anyone tell
>>me something about the job market for unskilled labor in Canada at
>>the moment? I'm 21, have a drivers' licsense and a (German) high school
>>diploma and have worked before, but do not have any degree. What 
>>possibilities are there for a young, prosperous globetrotter who wouldn't
>>say no to physical labour?
> 
> Unfortunately, unemployment in Canada is currently over 11%.  There is no
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Same in NZ, same, I believe, in Germany, same [just about] anywhere

> way you could get a work permit without already having a job offer from an
> employer in some profession where it could be shown that there was no
> Canadian suitable.

I suppose, then, that the tradition of working holidays for the young
must come to an end, and all in the name of labour protectionism. This
way everybody looses in the long run.

> 
> If you are prosperous, come for a holiday.  You'll enjoy it.
> -- 
> Ray Dunn at home        |  Beaconsfield, Quebec  |  Phone: (514) 630 3749
> ray@philmtl.philips.ca  |  ray@cam.org           |  uunet!sobeco!philmtl!ray
-- 
Murray A. Jorgensen [ maj@waikato.ac.nz ]    University of Waikato
Department of Mathematics and Statistics     Hamilton, New Zealand      
__________________________________________________________________
'Tis the song of the Jubjub! the proof is complete,
if only I've stated it thrice.'
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: carlos@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Miguel Borges)
Subject: Re: 500 New Jobs Per Day
Keywords: recession, jobs
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 20:57:44 GMT

pelton@ecf.toronto.edu (PELTON MATTHEW ALAN) writes:
>In article <carlos.726803398@morgan> carlos@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Miguel Borges) writes:
>>
>>"Seasonally adjusted" - What a great term.
>>
>>It means that the new unemployment rate does not count those who are
>>unemployed now and were unemployed at the same time last year.
>  
>  Sometimes it does, but they usually use the term 'anually adjusted.'
>'Seasonally adjusted' can also mean that compensation is made for 
>seasonal unemployment -- unemployment due to people working at jobs that
>can only be preformed at a certain time of the year.  (E.g. farm workers
>out of a job during the winter.)


If farm workers do not work during the winter, do they receive unemployment 
insurance?  If they do, then they should be considered "UNEMPLOYED".

I know that is not the case here in Newfoundland.  The average fisherman
probably works 10-16 weeks of the year.  He then qualifies for unemployment
insurance, and therefore does not work again until his "pogey" runs out.
(This, of course, is a gross generalization - but I have asbestos underwear)
When fishermen in Newfoundland collect U.I., they aren't considered 
"Unemployed", since the figures are "seasonally adjusted".  At certain times
in the middle of the winter, I would imagine that less than half of 
Newfoundlanders are actually working.

U.I. has become a way of life here, especially in some of the "outports".
While not always the case, people work simply to qualify for U.I.  
There was recently a protest by a group of women who were upset that they
didn't qualify for U.I.  Never mind that there were no jobs - they just
wanted their U.I.  The Provincial government even encourages this type 
of dependancy by creating "make-work" projects.  Ie:  10-week long 
construction jobs.  Meant to take people off the welfare rolls (paid by
the Province) and qualify them for U.I. (paid by the Feds). 
 
What a country.

-- 
\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\
C. Miguel Borges        and his EVIL TWIN BROTHER (tm)        Carlos M. Borges
carlos@morgan.ucs.mun.ca <-------------------------> carlos@garfield.cs.mun.ca
Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NF. Canada []*[] <- flag
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: Negative Income Tax (Was: Social programs)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 06:38:32 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.060911.18824@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.052049.2084@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>>i am ceasing my involvement in the discussion i have been conducting
>>on this newsgroup related to rights. it has totally degenerated
>>into silly, circular arguments. i see no purpose in continuing to
>>attempt this argument given the tactics of my current opponent.
>>and this discussion is not appropriate to this group anyway.
>>i'm sure most of the recipients of this group will be happy to see it go.
>>
>>if anyone wants to discuss this further, introduce it into
>>talk.politics.theory, or something like that.
>>especially you Gerald -- i would love to see the people
>>over there rip your "rights" to shreds. i just don't have time
>>to do it anymore all by myself. and just *try* your anti-objectivist
>>rhetoric in alt.talk.objectivism or alt.politics.libertarian.
>>
>
>It is kind of difficult to rip the assertion that "the individual
>is sovereign" to shreds...

nope. pretty easy since you can't state your axioms and you tolerate
inconsistency. kind of like that joke of a definition of government
you graced us with earlier.

>It should be noted that you have cut-and-run before you have given
>us a clear, unambiguous procedure for setting up a legitimate government,
>a government which even you admit is necessary at least to adminster
>the courts and the police.

nope.
i have "cut-and-run" because you are a dirty debater, and i am sick
of letting your irrational style aggravate me. you simply choose to
ignore the arguments which you can't deal with, and try to bait-and-switch
me with tangential topics which were not part of the original discussion.
i refuse to participate any longer. conducting arguments with intellectually
dishonest people is a waste of time. that you try to twist that around
is only consistent with the rest of your dirty tricks.


btw -- i will be forwarding the rest of your drivel from your last post to
alt.philosophy.objectivism. it is of course more of your bullsh*t
propaganda, and i will enjoy seeing it refuted.

--
charles
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: canadian subway
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 20:46:52 GMT

In article <pavalin-120193125012@47.107.67.22> pavalin@bnr.ca (Paul Valin) writes:
>Regarding the Montreal Metro, I've always wondered why they are missing
>a line number.  What am I talking about?  Well... there are 4 lines 
>right?  But they are numbered from 1 to 5.  One of the numbers is 
>not used.  I don't have a map handy but I believe that the number 3
>is missing (I'm not certain about this).  Anyone know why they 
>skipped a number?

i vaguely recall (and i could very well be wrong here) that they originally
planned five lines but built only 4 for some reason and they didn't
want to renumber them.

btw in Boston the lines are given colours and one of them has 4 subroutes:
they are named the Green Line B, C, D, and E routes... :^)
but there never was an "A".

--
charles
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: dannyb@panix.com (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Montreal subway, praise from NYer
Organization: Panix, NYC
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 00:06:46 GMT

To all the Canadian neighbors (and others) who responded to my original
query about rubber tires (or is it tyres?) and the Montreal subway:
  Thank you very much.
This past weekend, a friend and I (she refused to believe the trains ran
on tires) drove up there from NYC, saw the BIO-DOME (highly recommended)
and....
   Got on the #1 (green?) line at Assumption and Shebrooke (apologies for
spelling) and took the train to ?bio-viorde? (sp again?), got out at the
transfer stations, walked around, and came back.
  
There's just NO comparison to NYC or other major US systems.  or rather,
there is a comparisn, and the US systems fare miserably.

The rubber wheels make the system MUCH quieter - kind of like the newest
NYC cars running on welded rail, in an area with the experimental
soundproofing.  But this is the ROUTINE noise level there.  The trains I
was watching looked to be about 25 years old.

A few other comparisons:
   Montreal was MUCH cleaner than NYC 
   There were PADDED chairs to sit on.  This would be imposisble in NYC -
they'd get ripped apart in no time.
   there were advisory signs showing the emergency hand-activated door
openers located under the seats. In NYC, not only was this a secret, but
they had to get rid of them in the more recent cars.
   LOTS more escalators and elevators -i.e., better access to the system
(althouth Montreal seems to still have a long way to go on this)
   The wait time per train was about 5 minutes on a SUnday afternoon. 
In NYC it would be more like 15-20 minutes.
   There were WORKING and INTELLIGIBLE (in French) public address
announcements.
   Fire extinguishers, alarms, and other safety equipment was readily
available.
-------
   I -don't- know ho weffective the system is in emergencies requiring
evacuation.  It looked like things would be better than in NYC, but I
didn't check out communications, stairways, ventilation, or other
specialized safety features.
  
Oh, a quick point: I noticed that the tires weren't resting directly on
the trackbed.  Rather, they rolled across a concrete pad which in turn was
suspended over the trackbed.  Makes sense: this way you can add more
acoustical insulation, and, if the track should crack, you just lift it
out and replace it with a new one.

---------

Regarding dual purpose trains, i.e., that can run on either rails or
track:  Technologically this is, indeed, doable.  Many railroad systems
(actually, probably all), have numerous vehicles such as trucks and
similar, which have a normal 4 or six wheel suspension, and can also lower
a second susepension which has railroad wheels in it. (not really a
suspension, but you get the idea).  Conversion takes just a few moments.
--------

Thanks again to all.

dannyb@panix.com

Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok)
Subject: Re: Taxation as Theft (was Re: Negative Income Tax)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 00:55:40 GMT

In article <charles.726261980@menaik> charles@cs.UAlberta.CA (Charles Jobagy) writes:
>cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>
>>cheap, irrelevant shot, Gary, but not unexpected coming from a world-class yutz
>>such as yourself.
>
>>--
>>charles
>
>	Is this how you would converse with Gary in person and in public? 

ah, a not unanticipated objection to my somewhat insulting ad hominum.
well, sorry if i offended you, Charles, but Gary deserves far worse for
the intentional intellectual dishonesty he has consistently displayed in his
discussions with me. there are more ways to insult someone than to be direct,
as i was. i did think carefully before deciding to post what i did, though
in retrospect perhaps i let the desire for revenge outweigh better sense.
the truth is that in person i doubt Gary would dare (no pun intended)
to argue in the manner he has on the net, which is what *i* find offensive.

there are two sides to every story, and you have missed most of mine.

--
charles
From: warkent@ltisun14.epfl.ch (Ken Warkentyne)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Unique, eh?
Date: 11 Jan 93 11:42:41 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne---Laboratoire de
	Teleinformatique
In-reply-to: ray@philmtl.philips.ca's message of 9 Jan 93 02:09:27 GMT

Hah,  I checked in after spending three weeks in Japan and found
the longest series of followups that I had ever seen on USENET,
all by Gerald O. and Charles M. Kozierok.  There were at least forty;
I couldn't determine the total because the older ones were expired
on our system.  I suspect that this is not a record, however,
as certain discussions prior to the referendum must surely have
surpassed this one.

What is typically Canadian about this exchange is the way it
unfolded, which is plain to see with a threaded news reader.
If this were soc.culture.pit-bullistan, five hundred guys would
have jumped in and provoked a general melee, with Gerald and Charles
being lost in the volume and the subject line being craftily
modified to foil kill files (something along the lines of
capitalising the 'e' in 'Re:', the deletion of punctuation marks,
or the deliberate mispelling of some words).

As it is, we had some genteel interventions from Chris Browne, J.P.
Morrison, Dagmar's fiance and others, but by and large Chuck and Gerald
were left to slug it out on their own.  I didn't read any of it,
of course, since articles cross posted to any group with "politics"
in its title are in my kill file.  I just saw the detritus of
header lines which seemed to indicate the usual draw by exhaustion.

Hmm, Laurence Godfrey and Ted Kaldis must have been on holiday
as well.
--
Ken Warkentyne - warkent@ltisun.epfl.ch
                 Laboratoire de Teleinformatique, EPFL, Suisse.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: carlos@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Miguel Borges)
Subject: Re: 500 New Jobs Per Day
Keywords: recession, jobs
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 01:49:58 GMT

sitomlin@cantor.math.uwaterloo.ca (Stephen I. Tomlinson) writes:
>Statistics Canada reports that Canada's seasonally adjusted employment 
                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>rose by 102,000 jobs in the last five months of 1992.  That's a pace
>exceeding 500 new jobs per day.

"Seasonally adjusted" - What a great term.

It means that the new unemployment rate does not count those who are
unemployed now and were unemployed at the same time last year.

So, if you're jobless, but were jobless last January, then the government
does not consider you "unemployed".  Even if you do receive UI.

If applied to Newfoundland, for example, the "seasonally un-adjusted"
unemployment rate would probably be as high as 50 or 60%.

I love statistics.  And the way they are used to hide the truth from us.

Miguel - one of the few employed Newfs.
-- 
\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\_/\
C. Miguel Borges        and his EVIL TWIN BROTHER (tm)        Carlos M. Borges
carlos@morgan.ucs.mun.ca <-------------------------> carlos@garfield.cs.mun.ca
Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NF. Canada []*[] <- flag
Xref: sparky soc.culture.canada:9966 can.politics:11430
From: rich@boreas.whoi.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
Subject: Re: 500 New Jobs Per Day
Keywords: recession, jobs
Date: 13 Jan 93 02:54:30 GMT
Organization: Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

In article <carlos.726872264@morgan> carlos@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Miguel Borges) writes:
>pelton@ecf.toronto.edu (PELTON MATTHEW ALAN) writes:
>>In article <carlos.726803398@morgan> carlos@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Miguel Borges) writes:
>>>
>>>"Seasonally adjusted" - What a great term.
>>>
>>>It means that the new unemployment rate does not count those who are
>>>unemployed now and were unemployed at the same time last year.
>>  
>>  Sometimes it does, but they usually use the term 'anually adjusted.'
>>'Seasonally adjusted' can also mean that compensation is made for 
>>seasonal unemployment -- unemployment due to people working at jobs that
>>can only be preformed at a certain time of the year.  (E.g. farm workers
>>out of a job during the winter.)
>
>
>If farm workers do not work during the winter, do they receive unemployment 
>insurance?  If they do, then they should be considered "UNEMPLOYED".
>

Geez what a bunch of paranoids! Look - it's very simple: Say you report
unemployment statistics by month. What you find is a large seasonal 
variation (like, for example more jobs in December, less in January, 
etc. etc.) depending on all kinds of things (like what the major
industry is - i.e. logging, fishing, selling stuff in stores, etc.). 
*PLUS* some long-term drift that may (or may not) depend on the economy
as a whole. 

*THEREFORE* if you want to find out if the economy is in better shape
now than, say, 6 months ago, you have to get rid (correct for) the
seasonal variations - they tell you NOTHING (or very little) about the
economy as a whole. And look - they label it "seasonal adjustment" just
so you know what they've done! Think of it as "average unemployment".

In fact, corrections are a lot more involved than that, since you want
to smooth out "random noise" components somehow, so you usually (if you
are honest) make a series of corrections as more data is collected. For
example, 1986 data will be corrected when the 1987 data is available,
and again when 1988 data is available...

I know it's fashionable to cry "statistics==lies", but dealing with
real data is far more complicated than you probably realize, and
official government figures (say the ones published by Stats Canada)
are probably as honest as possible.





--
Rich Pawlowicz ----------------- INTERNET: rich@boreas.whoi.edu
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
"Home of the 99 cent squid burger (cheese extra)"
--------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics