HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Subject: Re: Are foreignborn kids of UK citizens british?
Reply-To: gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare)
Organization: The Bates Motel
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 16:08:15 GMT

golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gary L Dare) writes:
>>
>>You can be a U.S. citizen and acquire other citizenships by ancestral
>>heritage (e.g., Ireland) or for local residency purposes (e.g., Canada
>>by marriage, etc.) without jeopardizing U.S. citizenship as long as NO
>>renunciation oath is required during the naturalization process.
>>
>>U.S. naturalization has a renunciation oath so you can't go back to
>>whatever you had afterward; if you do and the Americans catch you,
>
>I thought (am I mistaken?) that the Canadian Citizenship Act does 
>not recognize the renunciation of Canadian citizenship unless it 
>is a renunciation made to a Canadian official...and that one can
>say anything to a foreign or US official, and that it will not
>affect how Canada views your citizenship.

Yep, no mistake there.  A 10-page form, done in triplicate, sworn in
front of consular officials.  Your renunciation at U.S. naturalization
is not valid to the Canadian government.  But if the Americans catch
you using your old Canadian (or whatever previous) citizenship, then
you're toast.

gld
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Je me souviens ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gary L. Dare				
> gld@cunixB.cc.columbia.EDU		Oct 26/92: Just say "OUI!"
> gld@cunixc.BITNET			(Let's worry about the economy!)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: bross@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Brian J Ross)
Subject: Re: gwen jacobs info?
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Brock University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 19:31:24 GMT

891406b@ace.acadiau.ca (STEPHEN BENNETT) writes:
:  well i'm looking for any articles written on gwen or any personal opinions 
: any of you may have on the whole issue/the court decision/the topless 
: ralleys.......i know this is an old issue that has been beaten to death but 
: any input would be greatly appreciated ....
: thanx in advance
: steve

Gwen and others believe that society is being sexist in forbidding women
to be topless in public, when there is no such restriction for men.
However, the historical reason for this societal rule is to prevent
lactating women from spraying passing pedestrians with milk.  
There is nothing more disturbing than having one's silk suit stained
by a passing 38D, or having a globule of lactose from a pair of jiggling
37C's thrown into one's beer while at an outdoor cafe on a hot summer's day.  

Another factoid: If female toplessness were condoned, then it would be
perfectly legal to touch women's breasts, as long as it is done in a
non-threatening, non-sexual way.  Casually touching breasts could be done
in the same way as a women touches a man's knee or elbow.  Breasts become
elbows in the eyes of the law.

:-)  <-- for the humour impaired.

-- 
Brian Ross                         "At the end of the day, all money gets you
bross@sandcastle.cosc.brocku.ca     is a better place to watch television."
                                    -- Dana Carvey
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews)
Subject: Re: Polling results : Canada
Followup-To: can.politics
Organization: CSS, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 23:33:04 GMT

In article <BvCF8D.nB@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca> pasward@maytag.uwaterloo.ca (Paul A.S. Ward) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.011430.1586@cs.sfu.ca> jamie@cs.sfu.ca (Jamie Andrews) writes:
>>     Because the electorate in BC is BRAINLESS.
>
>Well that's certainly a well-founded argument, isn't it.  Tell me, does
>this work for all arguments you get into; anyone who disagrees with you
>is brainless?

     Well, as a matter of fact it usually does work, for the
obvious reason.  (:-) for the humour-impaired)  But if you had
read any further, you would have seen the reasons I gave.
The BC electorate seems to think that Mike Harcourt gave away
the farm, whereas he gave away nothing that the other provinces
didn't give away except a delay in a few years before Commons
re-apportionment.  Said electorate also seems to think that
Charlottetown *means* gender-equal Senate, or that voting no on
Charlottetown is the only way to avoid a gender-equal Senate,
whereas what Harcourt is talking about is a *BC government law*
about Senate gender equality, which can be overturned by any
subsequent BC government, including whatever government said
electorate decides to install the next time they get tired of
*sensible* government.

     But what do you expect of an electorate which allows itself
to be led by Bill Bennett, Bill Vander Zalm, Rita Johnston, Rafe
Mair and the like.

--Jamie.
  jamie@cs.sfu.ca
"Standard brain-toy bullet list for any GnuAge grokabilly shopping trip"
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: jarena@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Joseph Arena)
Subject: News coverage of referendum
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Distribution: soc.culture.canada
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 23:58:41 GMT


I haven't seen a post about whether CNN planned to broadcast vote totals from
the east before polls closed in the west.  Does anyone know?  How much
coverage has CNN given to Canadian elections in the past? 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.canada:6896 can.politics:7356
From: mjenkins@alfred.carleton.ca (Michael Jenkinson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
Subject: Re: Ontario "socialism"
Date: 27 Sep 92 20:15:00 GMT
Organization: Carleton University

>>When the Toronto Sun is the only newspaper left in town because the
>>Star is destroyed because it can't hire replacement workers in a
>>strike you might think differently.

I wouldn't lose any sleep over that at all. Maybe Michelle
Landsburg would have to get a real job instead of boring us with that
incessant drivel all the time.

And there's always the Grope and Flail.

Michael Jenkinson
"My opinions are only my own, and sometimes they aren't even that."
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: svanegmo@napier.uwaterloo.ca (Stephen Van Egmond)
Subject: Re: Ontario "socialism"
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 19:12:55 GMT

>>When the Toronto Sun is the only newspaper left in town because the
>>Star is destroyed because it can't hire replacement workers in a
>>strike you might think differently.
>
>This is only your conjecture. Just as a businessman has the right to
>suddenly close his business entirely and retire, after giving the
>legally required advanced warning to his staff, workers should also
>have the right to shut down a business that mistreats them. It goes
>both ways, and up to now, it's been one way only; finally, what goes
>around may now come around, to the detriment of the businessman.
>Workers don't shut down businesses on a whim. Their own jobs and
>families are at stake. Also, workers are workers because they take
>pride in participating in production. Those who go to work every day
>hating every single minute on the job is actually a small proportion of
>the total work force. We do have free movement of people in Canada,
>right? The state certainly does not dictate who should get what job.

No, they do not!  The workers do not own a company or a business or the premises it exists on!  By definition, the owners do!  A property owner has the right to choose who he wants on his property and who he does not.  If he wishes to kick a particular group of people (say, workers) off his property and allow on others, that is his right, under the constitution.  If the workers don't like it, they can either A) take a hike or B) sit down and talk.

If I work on IBM Canada Inc., and me and a bunch of other programmers get together and say that we're not happy with out working environment -- does that give us the right to stop ALL the other workers from going in to do their jobs, that they're quite happy doing?  Is it our right to prevent other, newly hired workers, who may possibly be doing our job, from going in?  No!

Remeber what you said, 

"Don't we have the free movementof people in Canada?"

My point is, is that if workers have earned a raise by virtue of the quality of their work, the owners of that company would be foolish NOT to pay them extra; otherwise, they may see their good employees hired away by some other organization.  If you haven't earned a raise, you shouldn't get one.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics,can.general
From: ward@sun17.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca (Paul Ward)
Subject: Re: I was going to vote yes, BUT NOW ....
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 16:20:09 GMT

In article <BvCupK.1K5@animal.er.bell.ca> alex@animal.Bell.CA (Alex Laney) writes:
>
>This referendum is our 'third at-bat'. Don't make it three strikes and
>you're out. Vote yes despite the politicians, the interest groups, etc. These
>are the divisive forces.

So it doesn't matter what's in the deal - just vote yes, 'cause it's
our last chance.  No thanks.  I think the pitcher threw this one wild!
I'm not going to make a "ball" into a "strike".
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU (Stewart Clamen)
Subject: Re: I was going to vote yes, BUT NOW ....
Originator: clamen@BYRON.SP.CS.CMU.EDU
Reply-To: clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<1992Oct1.170734.3547@pandora.matrox.com> <BvH3vz.7E4.1@cs.cmu.edu>
	<BvI85F.DBw@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 21:26:06 GMT

In article <BvI85F.DBw@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca> pasward@maytag.uwaterloo.ca (Paul A.S. Ward) writes:

   In article <BvH3vz.7E4.1@cs.cmu.edu> clamen+@CS.CMU.EDU writes:
   >
   >New rights for Female senators?  I cannot find that in my copy of the
   >Accord?

   Well, look at the number of times it has "*"s or "to proceed with an
   accord".  Then ask yourself, what the individuals who will create
   those accords are saying.  If this deal gets passed, Bob Rae has
   already promised 50% Ontario senate seats will be for women.

This is, at least, one instance where Quebec's plan of apppointing its
senators is more sensible.

   >And yes, Francophone Senators do have a special voice in the proposed
   >Senate.  I am not sure that is can really be termed a "right", though.

   Yes, I noticed that too.  Funnily enough, though, I didn't notice
   the double majority required for anglophone senators when the issue
   pertains to ENGLISH language or culture.  Seems to me, we don't decide
   their culture, but they decide ours.

Not quite.  It specifies a "Double Majority", which means that it must
have a majority of BOTH anglophone and francophone (or European and
Native) senators to pass.

--
Stewart M. Clamen			Internet:    clamen@cs.cmu.edu
School of Computer Science		UUCP: 	     uunet!"clamen@cs.cmu.edu"
Carnegie Mellon University		Phone: 	     +1 412 268 2145
5000 Forbes Avenue			Fax:	     +1 412 268 5739
Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3891, USA
Xref: sparky soc.culture.canada:7098 can.politics:7738
From: smith@michael.harvard.edu (Steven Smith)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
Subject: Re: Appointments to the Supreme Court
Date: 1 Oct 92 18:38:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: michael.SMITH.92Oct1133813
	<1992Sep30.235208.22799@unixg.ubc.ca>
	<1992Oct1.010331.11516@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
	<1992Oct1.014235.25431@unixg.ubc.ca>
Organization: Harvard Robotics Lab, Harvard University

mathew@unixg.ubc.ca (Mathew B Englander) writes:
> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
> >
> >I maintain this will politicize the Court unnecessarily and undermine
> >the confidence in the impartiality of the Court and the rule of law.
> 
> Americans idolize their Supreme Court, and even those who disagree
> with some of its judgements respect and have confidence in its 
> partiality and the rule of law. Yet the U.S. appointment process is
> much more politicized than a post-Charlottetown Canada's will ever be.

This has a lot to do with the fact the tenure of Supreme Court
justices is ``during good behavior,'' and that their remuneration may
not be diminished.  The Executive's nomination and the Senate's advice
and consent are, of course, politically driven; however, once a
justice is confirmed, he is immune from direct political pressure, and
therefore immune from criticism that his interpretation of the law is
politically motivated.

What is the tenure of Canadian judges under the Charlottetown agreement?

> Given that the Court makes so many decisions affecting the power
> of the provinces, it is inappropriate that justices are appointed
> by the PM alone.

According to this logic, I, too, should be able to influence the
nomination process, as the Supreme Court makes many decisions that
affect me.  Furthermore, corporations (and now, foreign nationals who
contravene U.S. law) should also have a say.  But this is nonsense.
Maintaining the rule of law depends upon maintaining the independence
of the courts from transient popular demands.  I cannot even influence
the court through my representative in Congress, who has no power deny
Supreme Court nominees.

Why do you wish to give the provinces this special privilege?  Aren't
you afraid that they might use it to promote laws to enhance their own
power and limit your freedoms?  (E.g., existing Canadian language and
speech restrictions.)

Steven Smith
Xref: sparky soc.culture.canada:7043 can.politics:7582
From: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
Subject: Re: Ontario "socialism"
Date: 30 Sep 92 15:56:32 GMT
Organization: University of Waterloo


	A possible problem with the voucher system is that if the number
students  wanting to go to university greatly outnumber the supply of 
'slots' available at universities accepting the vouchers, the mediocre
universities will still get those students who  want  or need to university,
but who couldn't get  accepted at the 'desirable' schools.  

	Who  decides how many vouchers get issued?

							James Nicoll
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: dbowman@warp (Don A. Bowman)
Subject: Re: The Accord and BC and Health Care
Organization: University of Waterloo
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:13:59 GMT

Gary L Dare (gld@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu) wrote:
: 
: >There was a rather interesting program with Dan Rather on a couple of
: >weeks ago that contrasted Canada and US health care.
: 
: I believe that was PBS's famous "Frontline" documentary "Borderline
: Medicine".  One fault that I have had with that (besides the fact that
: it's old!) and the recent Consumers Reports series is that they ignore
: our population size and distribution (well, the American propagandists
: do it too, but two wrongs do not make one right), which are factors
: that work against us in many areas besides getting at health services
: ... which gets me to my second point, they both deemphasized the fact
: that our doctors and many of our hospitals are private and chosen by
: their patients.  The government can't control how people get sick and
: spend their insurance benefits; for some reason, Americans can't seem
: to get around the fact that our governments are in a passive role in
: this area, even when they *like* our "system!" (-;

Actually, no it wasn't by PBS. It was new (filmed in August, I believe). It
was, in my opinion, very unbiased. (hard to believe) He had lots of good
numbers and it was well researched. He went in to detail on % paid by each
for billing, % paid by each for tests, uneccessary operations, etc. There was
some really disturbing stats on premie babies. He said that, since US women
are so unlikely to see an obs. or gyn. before birth, there is a much larger #
of premie babies, which then cost MORE to look after than seeing the
expectant mother would have. He pointed out that infant mortality in the US
is similar to many third world nations, and that the US is the worst of all
industrialised (I presume G7) nations in terms of providing for middle and
lower class.

The downside of Canadian medecine is that esoteric or rarer procedures have
long waiting lists, and are not available as readily in outlying areas. The
upside to Canadian medecine was that it was universal, and rich/poor received
equally excellent care.


--
Don Bowman                (519) 744-6154     dbowman@zeus.uwaterloo.ca
Xref: sparky soc.culture.canada:7200 can.politics:7999 can.general:4774
From: warkent@ltisun14.epfl.ch (Ken Warkentyne)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics,can.general
Subject: Translation of why the government pays for education?
Date: 5 Oct 92 09:03:22 GMT
Reply-To: warkent@ltisun.epfl.ch
Followup-To: soc.culture.canada
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne

In article <BvIAuC.IC@sun3.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca>, ward@sun15.vlsi.uwaterloo.ca
(Paul Ward) writes that "some would say that the government should not be
paying for the education system."

In article <1992Oct4.203325.276@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, mousseau@paun01.pa.msu.edu (Mike Thorpe) writes:
|> [...] s'il est vrai que le principal benificiaire d'un diplome est son
|> detenteur, il n'en demeure pas moins que la societe en general s'en trouve
|> enrichie.  Faute de travailleurs specialises, il est impossible d'attirer
|> des entreprises oeuvrant dans les secteurs secondaire et tertiaire. 
|> L'arrivee de telles entreprises generera alors des retombees pour les moins
|> instruits; a la fois directement sous forme d'emplois crees dans la 
|> nouvelle entreprise et dans des entreprises parasites et indirectement,
|> par la generation de revenu d'impots.  Ce qui explique pourquoi le 
|> gouvernement doit etre responsable de payer pour l'education de tous. 

Pour les gens qui ne comprennent pas le francais, je me permets de traduire
ce texte bien ecrit.

|> If it is true that the principal benefactor of a diploma is its holder,
|> it is no less true that society in general is enriched.  Without
|> specialists, it is impossible to attract secondary and tertiary
|> industries.  The arrival of such enterprises will generate positive
|> side effects for the less well educated, both through the direct
|> form of jobs created in the new enterprise and in the business
|> generated for local services, and in the indirect form of increased
|> tax revenue.  This explains why the government must be responsable to
|> pay for education.

J'aimerais ajouter qu'il y a eu des etudes economiques qui montent
que l'augmentation de depenses sur l'education fait une benefice pour
l'economie.  Vous etes prier de chercher les details chez votre
economiste du coin.

I would just like to add that there have been economic studies that
indicate that increased spending on education increases the economic
wealth of a country.  Ask your local economist for details.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
From: dbowman@shade (Don A. Bowman)
Subject: Re: Appointments to the Supreme Court
Organization: University of Waterloo
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 15:13:27 GMT

Gerald Olchowy (golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca) wrote:
: 
: >>We are building in a appointment procedure that comes with a nuclear
: >>bomb, that we tear the judicial system of our country apart.
: >
: >Please Gerald: I can put up with doom and gloom from either side, but
: >comparing Charlottetown to Hiroshima is going a little far.
: >
: 
: Can you deal with a Humpty-Dumpty analogy? -)
: 
I can deal with this analogy. I think, before we have to scramble to put the
broken egg back together, we should get off the wall safely, through a YES
vote.

--
Don Bowman                (519) 744-6154     dbowman@zeus.uwaterloo.ca
Xref: sparky soc.culture.canada:7051 can.politics:7602
From: dbowman@shade (Don A. Bowman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.politics
Subject: Re: The Accord and BC
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:19:25 GMT
Organization: University of Waterloo
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Paul A.S. Ward (pasward@maytag.uwaterloo.ca) wrote:
: In article <BvCsEq.5rt@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> dbowman@shade (Don A. Bowman) writes:
: >
: >BC is very unlikely to join the US. Like all Canadians, the people of British
: >Columbia are very attached to Health Care. Under US rule, they would be
: >unable to have this.
: 
: Whether or not they would join the US, if they did it does not mean that
: they would have to give up medicare.  Did you know Hawaii has a medicare
: equivalent?

Medicare is funded through federal transfer payments from income tax. Many
states have what they call medicare (California does too) but it only covers
some 10% of the population, and doesn't cover many procedures. Additionally,
many doctors and hospitals do not accept it.

Where do you think BC would get the money to fund it? If BC had medicare, do
you not think people would come from out-of[province|state] to get it? Would
you pay for it through sales tax? 25% VAT? People would just shop in Alberta
or Washington.

There was a rather interesting program with Dan Rather on a couple of weeks
ago that contrasted Canada and US health care. The program advocated a
Canadian-style system for the US. They pointed out that Americans spend more
per capita on health-care, and less americans receive health-care. In one
area in LA, an obstetrician had 70% of all patients come in with NO previous
consultation. Can you imagine being pregnant, and not being able to see a
doctor? These women had medicare, but no hospital would accept it.

--
Don Bowman                (519) 744-6154     dbowman@zeus.uwaterloo.ca
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada
From: iaf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Innes Ferguson)
Subject: Re: Cross-Posting
Reply-To: iaf@cl.cam.ac.uk (Innes Ferguson)
Organization: U of Cambridge, England
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 11:52:39 GMT

dbowman@shade (Don A. Bowman) writes:

>Could I make a small request of some people:
>
>Please stop cross-posting your articles to: Can.Politics, soc.culture.canada,
>can.general.
>
>The people who read all three groups don't need this. People who don't read
>one or the other do so for a reason.

Fine, but don't forget us ex-pats who don't have access to can.*

Cheers... Innes
Newsgroups: soc.culture.canada,can.general,tor.general