HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: CZ94 <CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: French schools in Ottawa (was Re: Access denied?)
Organization: McGill University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:47:53 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.185109.19103@IRO.UMontreal.CA> laviers@IRO.UMontreal.CA (Cocotte Minute) writes:
>In article <1993Jan20.153913.4802@seachg.uucp> chrisb@seachg.UUCP (Chris Blask) writes:
>
>> A great deal of talk and debate (and action) in the 'English'
>> provinces about meeting the needs of the French-speaking members of
>> the population.  Just recently one of the big news items in Ontario
>> was the need for more French school space, and I believe the space
>> was alloted (I may be wrong, but the point remains).  Everything I
>
>       It's all a question of proportions... Ottawa, for example, which
>has always had a very big franco population, has never had a public franco
>school before 1979. When Francojeunesse school was founded, I went there for
>one year in 1980. The quality of French being taught was pitiful: the
>teachers even made serious grammar mistake in our report cards.
>I still don't know if there are any more public franco schools in
>Ottawa, a part from that one.

I had a look in the Ottawa phone book, under "Conseil scolaire
de langue francaise d'Ottawa-Carleton.  Listed there under
"Secteur catholique" are 36 elementary, 2 intermediate, 4 secondary
and 2 specialized (i.e. alternative and adult) schools.  Under
"Secteur publique" are 7 elementary (including intermediate) and
8 secondary (including adult and alternative) schools.  This gives
a total of 59 publicly-funded French schools in Ottawa-Carleton.

A reminder that Catholic schools are publicly funded in Ontario.  In
that province, "public school" can have two meanings, either "non-
private" (i.e. publicly-funded) or "non-Catholic" (i.e. non-denomina-
tional).  When Sebastien says there were no public French schools in
Ottawa before 1979, I suspect he's using the word "public" in the
sense of non-Catholic, rather than publicly-funded.  Given that
most Franco-Ontarians are Catholic (at least nominally) this is not
too surprising.
>
>My point is: Ontario (and I assume the other anglo provinces) has always
>been behind Quebec in it's treatement of lingual minorities.

True, but the French school system is expanding in Ontario, while the
English system is contracting in Quebec.
>
Tom Box
CZ94@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA

Newsgroups: can.general,ont.general,soc.culture.canada
From: dave@lsuc.on.ca (David Sherman)
Subject: Re: 1993 income tax rates (combined federal/Ontario)
Organization: The Law Society of Upper Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 04:56:39 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.151659.6958@sq.sq.com> I wrote:
>If there is interest, I can post the C source to a simple program
>to calculate 1993 tax, as I did some time ago for 1992.

I've had a number of requests for this, so here it is.
The brackets are the same as for 1992, since inflation was less than 3%.

/*
 * tax1993.c
 *
 * January 1993
 *
 * Calculate 1993 federal + Ontario tax from taxable income.
 * This program reflects the February 25, 1992 federal budget
 * and April 30, 1992 Ontario budget proposals.
 *  NOTE: THE RATES MAY BE CHANGED BY THE EXPECTED SPRING 1993 ONTARIO BUDGET.
 *
 * David Sherman, BA, LLB, LLM
 * Tax Lawyer, Consultant & Author
 * dave@lsuc.on.ca
 * tel 416-889-7658 / fax 416-889-3246
 *
 * This program may be freely distributed as long as this
 * header information is included with it.
 */

double atof();
main(argc, argv)
	char **argv;
{
	float tincome, basicfed, basicprov, fedsurtax, fedhighsurtax;
	float provsurtax, provhighsurtax, basicfedrate, basicprovrate;
	float margrate;	/* marginal rate */
	float perscredit;

	tincome = atof(argv[1]);
	if(tincome <= 0)
	{
		printf("Can't calculate for income of $%.2f\n", tincome);
		exit(1);
	}
	printf("taxable income $%.2f\n", tincome);

	if(tincome <= 29590)
	{
		basicfed = tincome * .17;
		basicfedrate = .17;
	}
	else if(tincome <= 59180)
	{
		basicfed = 5030 + ((tincome - 29590) * .26);
		basicfedrate = .26;
	}
	else
	{
		basicfed = 12724 + ((tincome - 59180) * .29);
		basicfedrate = .29;
	}

	printf("initial basicfed $%.2f\n", basicfed);

	perscredit = 1098;
	printf("personal credit $%.2f\n", perscredit);
	basicfed -= perscredit;
	if(basicfed < 0) basicfed = 0;
	printf("basicfed after credit $%.2f\n", basicfed);

	basicprov = basicfed * .55;
	printf("basicprov $%.2f\n", basicprov);
	basicprovrate = basicfedrate * .55;

	margrate = basicfedrate + basicprovrate;

	fedsurtax = basicfed * .03;
	printf("fedsurtax $%.2f\n", fedsurtax);
	margrate += (basicfedrate * .03);

	if(basicfed > 12500)
	{
		fedhighsurtax = (basicfed - 12500) * .05;
		margrate += (basicfedrate * .05);
	}
	else
		fedhighsurtax = 0;
	printf("fedhighsurtax $%.2f\n", fedhighsurtax);

	if(basicprov > 8000)
	{
		provhighsurtax = (basicprov - 8000) * .06;
		margrate += basicprovrate * .06;
	}
	else
		provhighsurtax = 0;
	printf("provhighsurtax $%.2f\n", provhighsurtax);

	if(basicprov > 5500)
	{
		provsurtax = (basicprov - 5500) * .14;
		margrate += basicprovrate * .14;
	}
	else
		provsurtax = 0;
	printf("provsurtax $%.2f\n", provsurtax);


	printf("TOTAL TAX $%.2f\n", basicfed + basicprov
		+ fedsurtax + provsurtax + fedhighsurtax + provhighsurtax);
	printf("marginal rate %f%%\n", margrate);
}

Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: robert@isgtec.com (Robert Osborne)
Newsgroups: can.general,talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: hunting dog wanted
Date: 24 Jan 93 18:42:30 GMT
Followup-To: can.general,talk.politics.animals
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Rosemary Waigh (g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu) wrote:
:

Welcome back Rosemary.

Maybe now you can explain why it's ok to painlessly kill vegatables for
food but it isn't ok to painlessly kill animals for food.  That is a
what point you skipped out on the last debate, isn't it?

: Because some of us are opposed to needless suffering and death, such as that
: caused by humans hunting.

But it isn't just hunting that your against.  Your position,  as I
understand it,  is that ALL killing of animals is immoral, humans
hunting for food is the moral equivalent of humans slaughtering
domestic animals for food.  Please be state clearly that this is your
position so the new readers of the group understand where you are
coming from.

:  "You have just dined, and however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is
:   concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity." - Emerson

Oh, here it is in your sig.  Thanks.

Rob.
--
Robert A. Osborne   ...!uunet.ca!isgtec!robert or robert@isgtec.com
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh)
Subject: Re: Killing animals (was Re: hunting dog wanted)
Organization: University of Toronto Computing Disciplines Facility
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 03:20:21 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.184523.20174@spdc.ti.com> achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach) writes:
>In article <1993Jan25.142223.20600@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>>A question for you:  do you think it is ok to painlessly kill humans?
>
>Certainly. Or painfully, if warranted.

Is it always okay to painlessly kill humans?  Suppose someone breaks into
your house and gives you a lethal injection as you sleep - has a wrong been
done?  (I think so.)

>I consider it necessary to my mental health, and do not consider a veggie
>diet an acceptable alternative to one which includes lean red meat. 

I think you are trivializing mental illness here, to compare it to the
mild and temporary inconvenience involved in making a few changes to your diet.
-- 
Rosemary Waigh             Undergraduate, Computer Science / Linguistics
g9rwaigh@cdf.utoronto.ca   University of Toronto
 "You have just dined, and however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is
  concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity." - Emerson
Newsgroups: can.general,talk.politics.animals
From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Subject: Re: Food chain (was Re: Killing animals (was Re: hunting dog wanted))
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:31:50 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.143751.3729@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>In article <1993Jan27.063010.20602@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan27.040833.4696@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>>>So?  Some animals, like rabbits, are herbivores => veganism is natural.
>>Unfortunately, this goes against the corresponding principle:
>>Some animals, like eagles, are carnivores => carnivism (?sp) is also
>>equally natural.
>

And some that we think are herbivores are actually omnivores. (See the 
current issue of Natural History) I wonder- are the great apes exclusively
vegetarian or are they opportunistic omnivores and poor hunters?

>What I am saying is that since the people reading this article have the 
>choice between veg(etari)anism and meat-eating, it is unethical for them
>to eat meat.  Since you have this choice, if you eat meat you are causing
>*avoidable* suffering and death!
>

I am against avoidable suffering, but death? May as well be against taxes.
It is inevitable for all things living. Only the manner varies, and none of
us knows when it will occur. A fatalistic attitude, I suppose, but I don't 
see it as something to be feared, only avoided. By the same token, I don't 
see my causing the death of another organism as reason for guilt, unless it
is done for no reason or in an inhumane (by my reckoning) manner.

>
>I would not fault someone for eating meat if the only alternative really
>was death for themselves.  However, no one reading this article is in that
>situation.
>

There has been a lot of discussion about the relative merits of a meat-free
diet. I don't read a lot about nutrition and probably won't, but I'm wondering.
Is this actually proven and accepted by the majority of experts in the field?
I get the gut feeling that there are maybe a few studies that have shown no
ill effects with a proper vegetarian diet and some ill effects from large 
amounts of meat. These would both be extremes. My feeling is that I do not
wish for a physique like Gandhi, which is my stereotype of a vegetarian.

Jeff Achenbach
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: nfs@volkl (Norbert Schlenker)
Subject: Re: Liberal Party Tax Policy
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Princeton University
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 16:20:29 GMT

In article <61TVXB3w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca> yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee) writes:
>I was challenged by Melvin Klassen, Gerald Olchowy and Peter McCorquade(sp)
>about LPC tax policy.  Here it is!!
>
>1) Review the Single Tax alternative as porposed by Dennis Mills to  the
>   Liberal Platform Committee

How about fleshing this out?  What is Dennis Mills' proposal?  What are
the chances that Dennis Mills is influential enough to get his proposal
reviewed, let alone adopted?

>2) high priority given to th development of a simplified, more equitable
>   system

*BZZZT*No content alert*

>3) review of the tax system with the purpose of abolishing the GST and
>redistributing the tax burden on the PRINCIPLE of fairness, equity ad ability
>to pay.
>
>There you have it.

There we have nothing.  There is exactly one specific proposal here,
the abolition of the GST.  The rest is smoke and mirrors.  Fairness,
simplicity, equity.

The Liberals have been in the opposition for years.  Surely there has
been time to develop a fair, simple, and equitable tax system on which
people can make a judgement.  Instead, it boils down to exactly what
every other party says: "Elect us and we will find a way of screwing
you that we think is fair, simple, and equitable."

Norbert
nfs@cs.princeton.edu
Newsgroups: can.general,talk.politics.animals
From: achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach)
Subject: Re: Killing animals (was Re: hunting dog wanted)
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:31:40 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.032021.11711@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>In article <1993Jan25.184523.20174@spdc.ti.com> achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan25.142223.20600@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>>>A question for you:  do you think it is ok to painlessly kill humans?
>>
>>Certainly. Or painfully, if warranted.
>
>Is it always okay to painlessly kill humans?  Suppose someone breaks into
>your house and gives you a lethal injection as you sleep - has a wrong been
>done?  (I think so.)
>

In self defense, war, defense of property, abortion, and capital punishment,
I have no qualms about killing humans or other animals. 


>>I consider it necessary to my mental health, and do not consider a veggie
>>diet an acceptable alternative to one which includes lean red meat. 
>
>I think you are trivializing mental illness here, to compare it to the
>mild and temporary inconvenience involved in making a few changes to your diet.

I am referring to the clearing of my mind which takes place when hunting. 
Fishing, hiking, canoeing, and leisurely walks in the woods have similar 
soothing effects, but nothing (for me) compares to deer and hog hunting.
I welcome change in my diet (variety is nice) and in fact enjoy many vegetarian
meals. I also enjoy meat, especially wild game. I can't think of any
vegetarians with a physique that inspires me to emulate them. I agree that 
too much of anything, including meat of a particularly variety, is probably
not healthy. I try instead to eat a varied and balanced diet including meat.
Alcohol in large quantities is also known to be unhealthy. I moderate my
intake. Many of my activities are perceived by others as dangerous. Risk
taking is a necessary part of life. Do you want to live forever?!(Red Sonya)


Jeff Achenbach
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: pelton@ecf.toronto.edu (PELTON MATTHEW ALAN)
Subject: Re: Liberal Party Tax Policy
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 17:18:09 GMT

In article <C1Eoz0.H7I@mach1.wlu.ca> dmccrea6@mach1.wlu.ca (doug mccready F) writes:
>It always scares me when parties begin talking about doing away with a tax
>like the GST and implementing a single tax or one geared to ability to pay.
>Tell me why the GST is not based on ability-to-pay. If I can afford a new
>car or whatever, am I not demonstrating ability-to-pay? What happens to new
>investment? If it is shot down then we have fewer jobs and then we have
>fewer tax payers down the road and the taxes for those still working go up
>and they decide to leave and that causes taxes to go up further. I for one
>would be one of those leaving and I provide the government with tax funds
>every week of the year. Already I can pay less taxes if I move and the
>marginal changes in tax rates are casuing me to think along those lines now
>let alone with a more reprehensive tax coming from the liberals.

  The reason a sales tax or a GST is said no not be based on ability to pay
is that it is a regressive rather than a progressive tax.  People with higher
incomes pay a larger percentage of their income for income tax;  this progress-
ive system is essential to a mildly socialist state like Canada.  A GST,
however, forces everybody, regardless of income, to pay the same amount every
time they buy something.  For poorer people, this translates to a higher 
percentage of their income;  at the very least, disregarding the fact that 
richer people invest far more than poorer people, it is a flat-rate tax.  A
graduated income tax fulfills the principles of equalization much better than
a sales tax.

-- 
	               / )/ )/ )        /    /
			/  /  /      --/----/--
                       /  /  /  / \   /    /
		      /  /  /   \_/\ /    /  
Xref: sparky can.general:6449 can.politics:11759 soc.culture.canada:10512
From: greg@organia.sce.carleton.ca (Greg Franks)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Liberal Party Tax Policy
Date: 27 Jan 93 21:45:51 GMT
Followup-To: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Organization: Systems and Computer Engineering, Carleton University.

In article <1993Jan25.194751.3748@mdivax1.uucp> robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson) writes:
   >A GST,
   >however, forces everybody, regardless of income, to pay the same amount every
   >time they buy something.  For poorer people, this translates to a higher 
   >percentage of their income;  at the very least, disregarding the fact that 
   >richer people invest far more than poorer people, it is a flat-rate tax.  A
   >graduated income tax fulfills the principles of equalization much better than
   >a sales tax.

   But, a sales tax widens the tax base and lowers income tax rates; this is
   considered to be good economics. What is needed is a balance. Whether a 7%
   GST effects this balance is open to debate, but a VAT-like tax nonetheless
   is a necessity for any high spending semi-socialist state like Canada.

   Sweden has not too long ago also lowered its top marginal tax rate from 82%
   to 50% which is what Canada's is. Thus, it would appear that as a
   percentage of total revenue, Sweden's VAT brings in more than Canada's GST
   + PST.

However, we live next door to the United States, where one from these
parts can go to New Hampshire where the equivalent GST + PST = 0%.
But why bother going that far.  New York is but 1 hr away from Ottawa,
and the state sales tax is 4% there.  

I suppose one does have to declare ones purchases at the border
though, so one theoretically gets dinged for another 7% :-). 

Only in Canada do we have a GST + PST.  Twice the bureaucracy for
equally bad service.  *sigh*



--
Greg Franks, (613) 788-5726               | "The reason that God was able to
Systems Engineering, Carleton University, | create the world in seven days is
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada  K1S 5B6.         | that he didn't have to worry about 
greg@sce.carleton.ca  ...!cunews!sce!greg | the installed base" -- Enzo Torresi
Newsgroups: can.general
From: dennis@news.ans.net (Dennis Ferguson)
Subject: Re: Canadian driving American-owned car in Canada -- illegal?
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:51:14 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Advanced Network & Services - Elmsford, NY
Keywords: stupid Canadian laws

In article <1993Jan24.201227.15499@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> wayne@csri.toronto.edu (Wayne Hayes) writes:
>I called Avis International to enquire how much a car rental would cost
>if I planned to rent from Seattle, Washington and drive to Vancouver,
>BC and back.  They informed me that Canada has some law stating that
>a Canadian citizen cannot drive an American-owned car in Canada.  Has
>anyone ever heard of this?  What is the rational for it?  Is there any
>way around it?

I think the problem isn't citizenship, it's residence.  And I'm not sure
if there is a federal law against this, though I do know that Ontario has
one (and BC might as well).

I know that Ontario has a law which prohibits you from driving a car which
has US plates when you have a Canadian driver's license.  The purpose of the
law is to prevent you from having your brother in Buffalo buy a car for
you to use, registering the car in New York and thereby allowing you to avoid
paying import duties and provincial sales tax on the car.  If you buy a
car in the US and bring it to Canada I think you need to re-register it,
and pay your taxes, at the border when entering the country.  I know many
(all?) US states have similar laws concerning US residents driving
Canadian-registered vehicles, with the additional problem that not all
cars made for Canadian use are importable into the US (due to generally
stricter pollution control regulations here) which means that even paying
the duties may not be sufficient.

I think it is correct that a side effect of this is that a Canadian resident,
with a Canadian driver's license, can't legally rent a car in the US and
drive it to Canada (or Ontario at least, and BC it seems).  You might get
it across the border if they only ask your citizenship and assume your
residence based on the license plates, but you'll get in trouble if you
get stopped while in Canada by someone who wants to see your driver's
license.  I assume no exception was made for rentals since it might leave
you free to lease a car in the US and drive it in Canada, similarly
avoiding paying the taxes.

Dennis Ferguson
From: leffler@physics.ubc.ca (Steve Leffler )
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: submitting federal tax returns via modem
Date: 20 Jan 1993 23:01:53 GMT
Organization: The University of British Columbia
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.ubc.ca

PHILIP@shark.stmarys.ca (Philip Howard (Computer Services)) writes:

>Is anyone here (virtually, speaking) submitting their tax return via modem? 

>I've come across mention of the software ($60 or so), but Revenue Canada's 
>reference on the tax form seems to imply that only "official" channels may 
>do this for you; eg, accounting firms. And of course they didn't publish a 
>phone number!

   I think part of the reason for that is that they only take tax returns over
"secure" lines.  
   There are companies which will simply transmit the information for you, so
you can do your return yourself and then have it sent by wire to get your
refund quicker.

				     ---Steven Leffler
					leffler@physics.ubc.ca

Newsgroups: can.general
From: jstrickl@cs.sfu.ca (James Strickland)
Subject: Re: More Lefties on the net lately
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 01:01:13 GMT

How can you tell from someone's posting that they're left handed?
Wow, you must really be able to read between the lines. :-)
Newsgroups: can.general,talk.politics.animals
From: g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh)
Subject: Killing bugs (was Re: Killing animals (was Re: hunting dog wanted))
Organization: University of Toronto Computing Disciplines Facility
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 03:27:19 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.193010.13137@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
>In article <C1F7Kq.Lxr@math.uwaterloo.ca> rbutterw@math.uwaterloo.ca (Ray Butterworth [MFCF]) writes:
>>Does this apply to all animals?  I think Einstein said something like
>>"I gave up gardening after I realized I was cutting worms in two."
>
>Worms aren't, strictly speaking, animals.  (I don't recall offhand
>which phylum worms are in - my last bio. course was in grade 9, which
>was, whew, a LONG time ago!  Early '80s, for sure!)

Actually, I do try to be nice to worms (I thought they were animals, but as
I mentioned in another more detailed post on this issue there are various
systems of classification).  After the rain I gently move the worms who have
crawled onto the sidewalk back to the soil before they dry up (or before
someone deliberately steps on them :-( ).

>However, Rosemary seems to draw the line HIGHER than the insects.  Or
>is it immoral to kill insects, Rosemary?  How about spiders?
>Arachnae?  Does this have any implications for certain types of
>"sea-food" that are from the same phylae as critters that are
>conventionally called "bugs?"

I am currently planning on investigating the insect issue in more detail
(if anyone has any good refs on the sentience or lack thereof of insects,
please mail me).  I do think insects have many admirable qualities.  (For
one thing, they are among the few animals who can thrive in Toronto...)
And I have always been a fan of spiders.  Recently I saw one of my parents'
friends who hadn't seen me in 10 years, and he remembered me as "the girl
who carries spiders around in her hands".
-- 
Rosemary Waigh             Undergraduate, Computer Science / Linguistics
g9rwaigh@cdf.utoronto.ca   University of Toronto
 "You have just dined, and however scrupulously the slaughterhouse is
  concealed in the graceful distance of miles, there is complicity." - Emerson
Xref: sparky can.general:6340 ont.general:2440 soc.culture.canada:10252