HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: satya@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Satya Bhamidipati)
Subject: Embassy address in Chicago...
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 21:46:52 GMT


    Could somebody in netland send me the address of the
    Canadian embassy (consulate) in Chicago ? 

       My address is: 

	    satya@ecn.purdue.edu.


     Thanks.

     Satya.

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: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 19:49:38 GMT

In article <1993Jan2.034012.25456@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
>In article <1993Jan2.013912.12749@ee.ubc.ca> jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes:
>>First, some negatives of negative income tax (does that make it positive ;-)
>>
>>1. Doesn't change the motivation (or lack of) for working vs.
>>starving
>
>I disagree on two counts: 
>(a) the issue is not "working vs. starving," but rather "working vs.
>living on the dole."

fine, then it doesn't change the motivation for working vs. living on the dole.

>(b) Right now, there is an absolute DIS-incentive to work if your
>income is below about $20K.  NIT would at the very least smooth the
>"discontinuity" here.

again, what about those who are currently working for less than $15K, who
if they were smart would immediately quit their jobs under NIT?

>>2. Could fail as splendidly as any other government program
>
>Always a risk.

overwhelmingly so. so why do it? because we want to defy the odds yet
again and hope this time will be different? *why should it be different*?

>>Some positives:
>>1. Could simplify things, by sacking a lot of civil servants
>>   (eliminate the social ministries, and let Revenue Canada collect
>>   taxes and print cheques...seems simpler(?))
>
>The improvement would be in the removal of "social ministries."

not likely to happen. people just scream "i want" and up they pop.

>>2. could let private sector, free enterprise expand:
>>   Ie, if Governments withdraws from running social services, and instead
>>   merely hands out money, letting recipients spend it, and letting
>>   the private sector compete to provide cheaper, better services.
>
>Good thought.

as i pointed out in another post, the giving of money via the current
system or the new one has nothing to do with privatization of services,
which i am all for. so why wasn't it done with the current system?

>>PLease, let's keep on topic....
>
>Hear, hear!  (Not "here, here!" as those who have neither read
>Hansard, nor know what it is, might say.)

heard! heard! :^)

>>And why do we have so many different levels of subsidies, payments,
>>handouts etc.? At least if we are going to stay with handouts, just
>>give individuals one big lump sum. Surely the administrative costs
>>would go down? 
>
>Even if admin. costs don't go down, it at least becomes more clear
>that it IS a handout.  People can't ignore it anymore then.
>
>I have a feeling that the TOTAL PAYOUT would go up

then NIT is unacceptable. because we need to cut the total payout.
it is bankrupting us.

--
charles
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: SCHEER@BEATE.RZ.FH-ULM.DE ((T. M.))
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
Subject: EMIGRATING TO CANADA ..
Date: 23 Dec 92 15:34:58 GMT
Organization: Germany sucks
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.22

HEY everybody out there in CANADA


I want to emigrate to CANADA ..
Has somebody gone through this process and could give me
some usefull hints ...

Would be really nice

 THANXX 'LOT

   ..... Thomas .....
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Excessively long posts (was Negative Income Tax)
Followup-To: alt.flame
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, University of Ottawa
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 93 03:00:11 GMT


The latest posting hit the 620 line mark.  The VAST majority is
probably attributions/requotes.  I REFUSE to plow through that much
restatement of old facts.  Particularly not over a 2400 baud
connection.

PLEASE could people get a little more cold-blooded about chopping
unnecessary quotes from postings?  If there's confusion, I'm sure that
people can go back and dig up the old posting.

The signal to noise ratio is really getting out of hand.

620 lines.  Possibly up to 48K of text.  Please try to cut it down a
little.  Or take the ENORMOUS posts to E-Mail.  Thank you.

-- 
Christopher Browne                |     PGP 2.0 key available
cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca           |======================================
University of Ottawa              | Genius may have its limitations, but
Master of System Science Program  | stupidity is not thus handicapped.
From: raoul@fangio.wa.com (Jeffrey E. Benedict)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Moving to CDN (You guys fell for Godfrey again)
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 04:41:47 PST
Organization: J. Benedict Computing
Reply-To: raoul@fangio.wa.com (Jeffrey E. Benedict)
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v1



> > And please don't bother to directly reply to this question, your response
> > just might be too exciting for me to handle...
> 
> Why ask the question if you don't want me to reply to it?
> 
> Anyway the answer is that it amuses me to irritate Canadians.
> 
> Laurence

Get a clue, Canadians!  This happens every month or so.  Someone asks
a question about Canada and Godfrey says, "Canada sucks" and everyone
calls him an asshole and yells at him for awhile.  

Meanwhile, Lawrence giggles his silly Limey ass off and waits for
the fire to die down, when he will throw another litre of petrol on
the fire to see it flame up again!

Don't play the game!

Jeff

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Jeffrey E. Benedict- raoul@fangio.wa.com - Port Townsend, WA. USA
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In His infinite mercy, Allah does not subtract from one's alloted span those
hours which are spent in contemplation of net.news. All praise be to Allah."
-- an obscure commentator on the early work of Al-Khowariszmi
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: Negative Income Tax (Was: Social programs)
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 20:59:55 GMT

robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson) writes:
>Gary L Dare (gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu) wrote:
>
>>However, numerous guests from the Republican and Libertarian side
>>on CNN Crossfire persist in that notion, and that is the general
>>impression that has been left on people.  John C. Whitehead, ...
>
>Gotta go w/ Charles on this one: Reagan was as much a fiscal
>conservative as was David Peterson; the only difference being on
>which area(s) to spend like a banshee - military or social. Gary,
>would I be wrong if I guessed that Mr Whitehead is one of the
>Reagan-can-do-no-wrong Republicans?

Absolutely right ... considering the movement that swept Ron into the
White House, he was the closest that was palatable in the realpolitik
that prevailed at the time.  So far, no true fiscal conservative has
ever made it into office -- not even Mags.  As I said, and you concur,
folks like John C. Whitehead "persist in that notion" so nobody on the
Republican side need consider looking any further than Ronnie Reagan's
example* -- after all, Ronnie tried and threw up his hands after ~18
months.  Jack Kemp has been trying to look "for real" but he shows
that he has a heart as well as a brain.  Bush could have done better
by being his own man and only going conservative on finances without
any conflict with his real self (i.e., up 'til summer 1979) but blew
it.  What Reagan did has defined the popular definition of "fiscal
conservative" for the lay American public ... sorta what happened to
"liberal" (i.e., nothing to do with the UK party of Disraeli and of
Churchill).

*Think about it.  Mulroney came into power *after* Reagan and Thatcher.
He knew how much room he had with which to maneuvre ...

Looks like we've got another term to re-name besides "negative
income tax" ...

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare
> gld@cunixd.cc.columbia.EDU 		Support NAFTA
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			 Eat Mexican  (El Teddy's ad)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: mbrownel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Mark Brownell)
Subject: Re: Canadian Culture Shock?
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 15:00:48 GMT


Laurence writes...

>Indeed it would be a shock if any (culture) were in evidence in canada.


Hey Laurence, just what is your problem? If you think Canada's so damn
boring why are you reading soc.culture.canada? And why flame twice? Was
it because everybody ignored your first flame?

Okay, I'll play your stupid little game - Here goes...

Obviously you think the Kiwi should send his kids to Germany instead of
boring old Canada. Such a lovely country - GERMANY - with such a
*colourful* history. And the people - so friendly - welcoming immigrants
with open arms! :-(

There you go, Laurence. You happy now?

Mark B.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,soc.culture.usa,soc.culture.african.american,can.politics,alt.activism
From: urkastig@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Robert Kastigar)
Subject: Re: NAFTA: statement from UFCW president
Organization: Educational Computing Network
Distribution: na 
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 02:47:51 GMT

>In article <1992Dec18.081527.11680@r-node.gts.org> ndallen@r-node.gts.org (Nigel Allen) writes:
>>   The average wage in the United States is $9.12 for food processing
>>employees.  In Mexico, the wage for comparable workers is less than a
>>dollar -- $.62 an hour.  The sweat-shop wages combined with the tax
>
>Um, two points for the union here - Why not start chapters in the "sweat shop"
>environment in Mexico?  Also, if the wage differential is so great NOW, then

Nice try, Brent - but the rules are different in Mexico!  The US has
labor protection, the Wagner Act, the NLRB, and recognition in the law.

Mexican law severally hampers labor organization.

Now, if NAFTA required all the participating countries to follow the
same rules as the US and Candada have insofar as labor goes, maybe we
could back up and reconsider it. . .

Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Negative Income Tax (Was: Social programs)
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 07:45:18 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.170925.18175@athena.mit.edu> cmk@athena.mit.edu (Charles M Kozierok) writes:
>In article <1992Dec29.103313.24923@ee.ubc.ca> jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes:
........
[ long argument between libertarians ]

I'm sure you will concede that a tax-and-transfer system of welfare
(or negative income tax...ick), is a STEP in the right direction.
It has the benefit of being more efficient than the current system
(you are right about the implementation: if it were just slapped on
top of the same same mess, it would make things worse, not better.)
And it is important to take a step in the right direction, rather than
stay in one place, cursing the darkness around you.

Hopefully, with the continued reforms in trade, de-regulation, etc.
we will all be a lot more prosperous, and we won't begrudge the taxes
as much  (OK, a longshot....)

I think a good first step is all that we can hope for, as this country
has been ruined by governments, and now seems to have a deeply
ingrained collectivist, pro-state, anti-individual agenda...I'm still
trying to be optimistic, but I'm not going to hang around to get buggered
by governments, if they try tip Canada in the wrong direction again.
I just know they've got their knives out, just waiting to unravel what
little progress has been made in the past 8-9 years.


-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,talk.abortion,talk.politics.animals
From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Subject: Re: Abortion, Caves, Galen (WAS Vegetarianism and abortion)
Date: 21 Dec 92 11:54:23 CST

In article <schuck.724868803@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>>  Little Stevie Novak writes:
>
>>> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>>>Just for thought:
>>You forgot to think.
>Think? I asserted 2 facts which happen to be true, and a 3rd you claim
>to be false, but isn't.
>>>In Canada, if you kill a baby 1 hour *before *it's born, and the 
>>>mother approves, it's called an abortion.
>>Very good!
>>>In Canada, if you kill a baby 1 hour *after* it's born, and the
>>>mother approves, it's called murder.
>>Well, of *course* it is.
>>>There is no fundamental physical differences between the babies in the
>>>two cases.
>>Of course there is, Brucie.  The fetus you're confusing with a baby is still
>>attached to the women and dependent wholly on her body for life.
>Yes it is attached, but NO it isn't dependent wholly on her body for life.
>
You are missing something, here.  If a rock falls on the 
woman's head and she dies, the fetus will die too, unless
it can be freed from her body very quickly.

>Out of the womb it will survive fine with the normal amount of care.
>And I repeat, there is *no* physical differences between the baby.
>
This statement is *not* correct.  Do your homework.

>>The actual baby, born, alive and breathing, is not.
>The normal amount of care is still needed. A baby does not exist in
>isolation. It still need to be fed for example, kept warm, etc.
>>Pretty simple...like you, Bruce.
>
>You should get you so-called facts straight Stevie.

Steve is apparrently in posession of some facts, Brucie.
You, on the other hand, are in need of clues.

muriel
standard disclaimer
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: vogelm@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Michael Vogel)
Subject: Weights and Measures
Originator: vogelm@hphalle6h.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
Organization: Technische Universitaet Muenchen, Germany
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 17:18:39 GMT


I would like to get some information about weights and measures.
Did Canada change completely to the metric system?
Are there still British imperial weights and measures in use in Canada?
If yes, which ones?
Did the majority of Canadiens appreciate the introduction of the metric
units?

Any information concerning weights and measures is appreciated.

  Thanks for your efforts

  Michael Vogel, Munich, Germany

  e-mailaddress: vogelm@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: nfs@volkl (Norbert Schlenker)
Subject: Re: Social programs (Was: Reform party platform)
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Princeton University
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 18:22:06 GMT

In article <92343.193806SPRAGGEJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> John G. Spragge <SPRAGGEJ@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>I hold the view that social programs should be universal, because
>most social programs address needs that we all share. Everyone,
>rich or poor, has similar child care needs; will get sick, and
>will get old...

Everyone, rich or poor, has similar nutritional needs, too.  Should
the government be a monopoly provider of bread?  Do you really want
a national Department of Clothing, since everyone needs clothes?

>I have yet to see anyone challenge the concept of universal
>fire protection, or defence, or police services.

Here it is then.  I challenge the concept of universal fire protection.
I see no problem with privatised fire departments.  I do not believe in
private police or defence forces:  pointing a gun at someone requires
governmental controls, IMO.

Norbert
nfs@cs.princeton.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: diamond@jit533.jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Subject: Re: <Postal> (OTTAWA) Canada Post has made it official... the cost of
Keywords: canadian broadcast, government budget, government
Reply-To: diamond@jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Japan , Tokyo
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 11:36:33 GMT

In article <CpostalU2DT1009ae@clarinet.com> clarinews@clarinet.com ((Neufeld/Standard Broadcast News)) writes:
>	Canada Post spokesperson Ida (EE-dah) Irwin says Canada still has the
>second lowest basic postage rate in the world,

What other countries are in Canada's world?  Obviously Canada Post's world
includes one, but only one, of the following countries; I wonder which one?
Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, India, Pakistan, Nepal,
U.S.A., and probably a few dozen others.  Fortunately for Canada Post,
Hong Kong can be considered not a country.
--
Norman Diamond                diamond@jit.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
Pardon me?  Or do I have to commit a crime first?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: godfrey@vxdesy.desy.de
Subject: Re: Canadian Culture Shock?dir
Organization: (DESY, Hamburg, Germany)
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:15:58 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.150048.9606@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>, mbrownel@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Mark Brownell) writes:
> 
> Laurence writes...
> 
>>Indeed it would be a shock if any (culture) were in evidence in canada.
> 
> 
> Hey Laurence, just what is your problem? If you think Canada's so damn
> boring why are you reading soc.culture.canada? And why flame twice? Was
> it because everybody ignored your first flame?
> 
> Okay, I'll play your stupid little game - Here goes...
> 
> Obviously you think the Kiwi should send his kids to Germany instead of
> boring old Canada. Such a lovely country - GERMANY - with such a
> *colourful* history. And the people - so friendly - welcoming immigrants
> with open arms! :-(
> 
> There you go, Laurence. You happy now?
> 
> Mark B.
> 
I think I said in a recent posting that I despised Germany, so I can't
agree with you.  

Laurence

Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: dsza@elm.lle.rochester.edu (Tony De Souza)
Subject: Toronto
Summary: PARTY, BARS, ETC
Keywords: THINGS TO DO!!!!
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 02:46:10 GMT

I live in Rochester, NY (within 3 hours driving distance from 
Toronto), and before my next visit to Canada, I decided to ask 
all you folks in Toronto for the name of some hot spots where 
to single guys can have a blast.  

Thanks for your help

Tony DeSouza

--
Tony DeSouza                                                           \ | /
Winners were once dreamers --------------------------------------------- @ -
University of Rochester Laboratory for Laser Energetics                / | \
dsza@elm.lle.rochester.edu		"Ignorance has been good to me"
Xref: sparky soc.culture.canada:9632 can.politics:11049 talk.abortion:53033 talk.politics.animals:10560
From: proberts@informix.com (Paul Roberts)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics,talk.abortion,talk.politics.animals
Subject: Re: Abortion, Caves, Galen (WAS Vegetarianism and abortion)
Date: 24 Dec 92 18:01:23 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

This argument ("I am against abortion because had my parents chosen it,
I wouldn't be alive at all") would seem to apply equally well to
contraception. 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.canada:9590 can.politics:10994
From: nfs@volkl (Norbert Schlenker)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
Subject: Re: Social programs (Was: Reform party platform)
Date: 21 Dec 92 18:16:36 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Dec08.135338.560@r-node.gts.org> wayne@r-node.gts.org (Wayne) writes:
>I suspect it would be difficult to find a place where you could plant a
>garden and have access to a woodlot for $500. Telling people to get out
>of the city isn't an answer. All you want to do is hide poverty where
>no one can see it out in the backwoods.

Not at all.  It is clearly very difficult to live in any city on $500
per month, but that doesn't mean that I'm trying to hide poverty in the
backwoods.  I do expect people to be at least somewhat self-reliant, and
I plan to make that clear by providing only a subsistence.  You cannot
expect the government to provide a living, even a poor one, in the most
expensive parts of the country.

To be specific, I used to own a house on 125 mostly wooded acres in
rural N.S.  I rented it for $100 per month, a market price in 1989.
My tenants cut wood for the stove, planted a garden, and kept
chickens.  Their cash outlays, for a family of four, were easily under
$500 per month.  Certainly their lifestyle wasn't posh, but they
weren't poor in the sense of sleeping on a sewer grate at Yonge and
Queen.

>I agree that the object is to leave as much money in people's pockets
>as possible but if tax cutting was so easy then any number of
>governments would have done it long ago.

Governments haven't even tried.  The history of government in Canada,
both federal and provincial, is a list of handouts to the sheep that
were bleating the loudest.

Norbert
nfs@cs.princeton.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics,talk.abortion,talk.politics.animals
From: motto@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (mary.rita.otto)
Subject: Re: Abortion, Caves, Galen (WAS Vegetarianism and abortion)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 01:16:04 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.063535.19448@cdf.toronto.edu> g9rwaigh@cdf.toronto.edu (Rosemary Waigh) writes:
>In article <1992Dec20.043628.3553@bmerh85.bnr.ca> nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau) writes:
>>Not far from my home town (we're talking small town, here!), a pregnant
>>woman, in the final stages of pregnancy, was diagnosed as carrying a
>>hypercephalic child - literally, big-headed.  The child could not
>>survive, and the birth would have killed the mother.  (Caesarians, in
>>those days, were much more drastic procedures than now.)  The doctors
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And cutting up a full term baby ISN'T a drastic procedure?
This has the ring of folklore about it rather than truth.
>>chose to abort - to cut up the child within the womb and extract it
>>piece by piece.
>Rosemary Waigh             Undergraduate, Computer Science / Linguistics

Ro,
I've come to expect better analysis than this from you.
Mary
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics