|
Has anybody seen the new $20 bill? (pg. 23)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DigiNut |
I'm sorry Elyot, but what the is this garbage that you wrote? At first I was just bemused but now I'm really annoyed.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ_Elyot
It appears that you have a problem with our Charter of Rights and Freedoms and our Constitution, which set forth the very set of values upon which our laws our based! |
What the HELL does this have to do with any of it? There is NO mention of welfare or public health care in the charter of rights. THOSE THINGS AREN'T "RIGHTS". And most importantly, I don't know why I have to keep saying this, THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS APPLIES TO CITIZENS NOT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS!
| quote: | | All capitalist societies need an upper, middle, and lower class to function, and proposing that the "poor and downtrodden" don't deserve a social safety net is a prime recipe for increasing the gap between the rich and the poor, which hurts our economy (rich people save a higher % of their money instead of spending it, and when they do spend it, they spend a much higher % of it outside Canada). The "trickle down" theory of economics is inherantly flawed... "bubble up" economics empowers individuals to become productive and ends up benefitting the economy, including the rich, more sustainably over the long term. |
How can you not realize how little sense this makes? In the first sentence you say we NEED an upper, middle and lower class to function (I'm not even going to get into the issue of where you draw the line between those classes and how intrinsically flawed that distinction is in the first place), and then you insist that a society needs to "bridge the gap" between classes, i.e. eliminate the classes altogether!
"Bubble up" economics is communism, and has been proven not to work in a real society, ever. The reason that "the Rich" spend a higher percentage of their money outside Canada is because the most expensive things you can't even get in Canada, like for example a ing MRI. It's not even the USA, we have Canadians going to third-world countries to get medical care because it's just that bad here. But as long as everyone gets the SAME health care, it doesn't matter how ty it is, right? Please... :rolleyes:
The "trickle down" theory has nothing to do with this. I'm not even remotely concerned about how money will make its way to "the poor", because in a "capitalist" society, the poor can easily stop being "the poor" by being productive. That's the fundamental underlying principle of capitalism we're talking about here.
| quote: | | Would you rather live in a country like America where you can have access to life, (and fear of losing it because of their "right to bear arms") liberty (for those with money and power), and pursuit of happiness (at the expense of the environment, minorities, and the people you screw in order to get ahead)?? |
This is the absolute worst propaganda I've ever heard. Good old anti-Americanism. It's ironic how in the Southern states where the "right to bear arms" is held most dear, there is very little crime at all.
Your entire discussion here hinges on the patently incorrect notion that every successful person has to "screw" someone or something to get ahead. That ultimately is based on (a) jealousy, insecurity, and other petty emotions, and (b) the mistaken theory which communism relies upon that there is a finite amount of productivity in any economy. Point (b) was proven wrong hundreds of years ago by Adam Smith.
| quote: | | Sure, people abuse the system... but most of them aren't happy anyway. |
Oh, okay. As long as THEY AREN'T HAPPY, it's okay for them to be TAKING MY MONEY.
| quote: | | The environmental, social, and economic impacts of such people are NOTHING compared to impact of greedy, driven, heartless American corporations that send jobs overseas, wrecklessly pollute the environment, waste the world's natural resources, and promote dangerous globalization at such a rapid pace that it has become a threat to worldwide sustainable development. All this... for what? So you can drive SUVs? So your Big Mac can taste exactly the same in 185 countries? So 90% of all of American wealth is controlled by less than 1% of the population? |
Dear ing lord, read an economics textbook. Let me introduce you to a few points here:
- In several areas of Canada where the primary economy used to be from fishing and farming, their economies flatlined. Now they are thriving because the USA has "sent jobs overseas" to Canada, via several millions jobs at massive call centres.
- Globalization is not "dangerous", and even the raving isolationists in politics have come forward and admitted that things like NAFTA were ultimately good for our country. Even when our dollar value was at an all-time low, "globalization" was STILL good for our country because Americans would spent loads of money buying things in Canada because it was so cheap. Low currency = high tourism = money coming into Canada = good. See how a free market has a way of balancing itself out naturally? We don't need government interference!
- The "90% of American wealth is controlled by less than 1% of the population" is a statistic, nothing more. It has no meaning whatsoever. The 1% are CEOs of massive conglomerates - but why should I care that someone else is making $50 million a year as long as I'm making 7 figures? You act as though this wealth somehow NEEDS to be redistributed, but there's no logical argument you can come up with to support that position. They worked for their money, and it was the desire for profit that motivated them to work and be productive. These same people who control 90% of the wealth are also responsible for 90% of the jobs - if it wasn't for them, then you would be piss-poor broke.
- Welfare makes up the LARGEST (yes you heard me, even more than health care and the national debt) chunk of government spending at around 45% of tax dollar revenue (I'll have to check that but I think it's between 40 and 50). Considering that the hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes are far more substantial than the hundreds of millions of dollars taken in by "big business", then yes, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that the vast array of welfare-cheating societal parasites really ARE doing more damage to society as a whole than large corporations, because there are only a few large corporations compared to thousands or even millions of parasites.
| quote: | | If you don't like this country, nobody's making you live here. Honestly, you can bash our politicians and argue about our laws, but when you say things like that about our country, it just makes you look ungreatful and selfish. Be thankful for what Canada has to offer. Go live in India or Sri Lanka if you think it's so terrible here. |
ME BASH THIS COUNTRY? Buddy, I think you need to gloss over this thread again and see who is really showing the disrespect here. What is your argument here, that we're slightly better off than some 3rd-world countries so we therefore shouldn't complain? And why the would I want to live in Sri Lanka when the USA is just down the road?
Man oh man, the unfettered ignorance is flying high in this thread. Do you write your own material, or did you scoop this out of a typical Left-wing university textbook that spends 10 chapters on Marx and half a page on Smith? |
|
|
| rabbitjoker |
| quote: | Originally posted by crazedcanuck
it is the colour of a $5 |
CANADIAN JOURNEY SERIES
$5 = blue.
$10 = purple
$20 = green.
$100 = brown
 |
|
|
| j_spot |
| is the red fifty no longer in circulation? |
|
|
| rabbitjoker |
Yes, it is. But they are still using the Red 1986 Version (BIRDS OF CANADA SERIES).
 |
|
|
| dance2dabeat |
| quote: | Originally posted by rabbitjoker
Yes, it is. But they are still using the Red 1986 Version (BIRDS OF CANADA SERIES).
|
CRAZY...I didn't even know we had a new $100 bill. Not that I should be surprised it's not like I have them on me ever! I just saw the new $20 a day or two ago. When I worked retail and someone handed me a $100 bill for a 5 dollar sale, I'd be thinking "you gotta be kidding me" and have to inspect it to see it it was fake. Back in the day when I worked at walmart people used fake bills all the time. I remember when we got fake $5 when the new ones first came out. I never knew what the point of that was. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I'm sorry Elyot, but what the is this garbage that you wrote? At first I was just bemused but now I'm really annoyed.
What the HELL does this have to do with any of it? There is NO mention of welfare or public health care in the charter of rights. THOSE THINGS AREN'T "RIGHTS". And most importantly, I don't know why I have to keep saying this, THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS APPLIES TO CITIZENS NOT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS!
How can you not realize how little sense this makes? In the first sentence you say we NEED an upper, middle and lower class to function (I'm not even going to get into the issue of where you draw the line between those classes and how intrinsically flawed that distinction is in the first place), and then you insist that a society needs to "bridge the gap" between classes, i.e. eliminate the classes altogether!
"Bubble up" economics is communism, and has been proven not to work in a real society, ever. The reason that "the Rich" spend a higher percentage of their money outside Canada is because the most expensive things you can't even get in Canada, like for example a ing MRI. It's not even the USA, we have Canadians going to third-world countries to get medical care because it's just that bad here. But as long as everyone gets the SAME health care, it doesn't matter how ty it is, right? Please... :rolleyes:
The "trickle down" theory has nothing to do with this. I'm not even remotely concerned about how money will make its way to "the poor", because in a "capitalist" society, the poor can easily stop being "the poor" by being productive. That's the fundamental underlying principle of capitalism we're talking about here.
This is the absolute worst propaganda I've ever heard. Good old anti-Americanism. It's ironic how in the Southern states where the "right to bear arms" is held most dear, there is very little crime at all.
Your entire discussion here hinges on the patently incorrect notion that every successful person has to "screw" someone or something to get ahead. That ultimately is based on (a) jealousy, insecurity, and other petty emotions, and (b) the mistaken theory which communism relies upon that there is a finite amount of productivity in any economy. Point (b) was proven wrong hundreds of years ago by Adam Smith.
Oh, okay. As long as THEY AREN'T HAPPY, it's okay for them to be TAKING MY MONEY.
Dear ing lord, read an economics textbook. Let me introduce you to a few points here:
- In several areas of Canada where the primary economy used to be from fishing and farming, their economies flatlined. Now they are thriving because the USA has "sent jobs overseas" to Canada, via several millions jobs at massive call centres.
- Globalization is not "dangerous", and even the raving isolationists in politics have come forward and admitted that things like NAFTA were ultimately good for our country. Even when our dollar value was at an all-time low, "globalization" was STILL good for our country because Americans would spent loads of money buying things in Canada because it was so cheap. Low currency = high tourism = money coming into Canada = good. See how a free market has a way of balancing itself out naturally? We don't need government interference!
- The "90% of American wealth is controlled by less than 1% of the population" is a statistic, nothing more. It has no meaning whatsoever. The 1% are CEOs of massive conglomerates - but why should I care that someone else is making $50 million a year as long as I'm making 7 figures? You act as though this wealth somehow NEEDS to be redistributed, but there's no logical argument you can come up with to support that position. They worked for their money, and it was the desire for profit that motivated them to work and be productive. These same people who control 90% of the wealth are also responsible for 90% of the jobs - if it wasn't for them, then you would be piss-poor broke.
- Welfare makes up the LARGEST (yes you heard me, even more than health care and the national debt) chunk of government spending at around 45% of tax dollar revenue (I'll have to check that but I think it's between 40 and 50). Considering that the hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes are far more substantial than the hundreds of millions of dollars taken in by "big business", then yes, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that the vast array of welfare-cheating societal parasites really ARE doing more damage to society as a whole than large corporations, because there are only a few large corporations compared to thousands or even millions of parasites.
ME BASH THIS COUNTRY? Buddy, I think you need to gloss over this thread again and see who is really showing the disrespect here. What is your argument here, that we're slightly better off than some 3rd-world countries so we therefore shouldn't complain? And why the would I want to live in Sri Lanka when the USA is just down the road?
Man oh man, the unfettered ignorance is flying high in this thread. Do you write your own material, or did you scoop this out of a typical Left-wing university textbook that spends 10 chapters on Marx and half a page on Smith? |
Typical Nutsack post, either you agree with him or your an idiot for not having the same view as him.
pssssssssssssst
| quote: | Originally posted by Cyrus King
watch THIS |
|
|
|
| DJ_Elyot |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I'm sorry Elyot, but what the is this garbage that you wrote? At first I was just bemused but now I'm really annoyed. |
I didn't get personal... do you really feel the need to sink to such a level? If you wanted to make me look like an idiot, you're more than free to do so by making some compelling arguments, but this just makes YOU look immature.
| quote: |
But as long as everyone gets the SAME health care, it doesn't matter how ty it is, right? Please... :rolleyes:
|
So does this mean that a sick patient shouldn't receive treatment just because they can't afford it?
Example:
I'm a diabetic living in a low income, single-parent family. I'm not yet entirely self-sufficient because I'm working on getting my education, which isn't exactly cheap. I treat my (type I) diabetes with insulin pump therapy, which isn't exactly cheap, but is covered by health insurance because it enhances my quality of life and decreases my long-term healthcare costs. In America, I'd never be able to afford it, I'd instead have to take 5 needles a day to live, and I'd have kidney failure by the time I was 50. I'm a hard-working, honest citizen, and I shouldn't have to suffer. Your one-sided attitude would change if you were in my shoes.
| quote: |
I'm not even remotely concerned about how money will make its way to "the poor", because in a "capitalist" society, the poor can easily stop being "the poor" by being productive. That's the fundamental underlying principle of capitalism we're talking about here.
|
How can they become productive when jobs are harder to find and the wealth keeps being skewed more and more toward the rich? At least they have unions to keep their incomes above the poverty line. Money keeps being sucked out of society by rich corporations who don't care about the people they hurt in order to churn big profits.
| quote: |
This is the absolute worst propaganda I've ever heard. Good old anti-Americanism. It's ironic how in the Southern states where the "right to bear arms" is held most dear, there is very little crime at all.
|
There is 1 bank robbery every 97 minutes and 1 homicide every 37 hours in Los Angeles alone. Per capita, that's still much higher than it is here. I know it is an isolated example, but if you look at the statistics for major American cities and compare them with cities like Toronto and Montreal in terms of violent crimes, you will see huge differences that show Canadian cities to be much safer. "very little crime" indeed.
| quote: |
Your entire discussion here hinges on the patently incorrect notion that every successful person has to "screw" someone or something to get ahead. That ultimately is based on (a) jealousy, insecurity, and other petty emotions, and (b) the mistaken theory which communism relies upon that there is a finite amount of productivity in any economy. Point (b) was proven wrong hundreds of years ago by Adam Smith.
|
The "petty emotions" you listed in (a) are universal human traits that stem from the concept of humans owning private property. It's also the reason why communism doesn't work. If you claim that it's false, you're essentially claiming that communism should work, which contradicts a statement you made 2 paragraphs ago. Being more careful in the construction of your arguments should prevent mistakes like this.
| quote: |
- In several areas of Canada where the primary economy used to be from fishing and farming, their economies flatlined. Now they are thriving because the USA has "sent jobs overseas" to Canada, via several millions jobs at massive call centres.
- Globalization is not "dangerous", and even the raving isolationists in politics have come forward and admitted that things like NAFTA were ultimately good for our country. Even when our dollar value was at an all-time low, "globalization" was STILL good for our country because Americans would spent loads of money buying things in Canada because it was so cheap. Low currency = high tourism = money coming into Canada = good. See how a free market has a way of balancing itself out naturally? We don't need government interference!
|
What will you say when the jobs you mentioned in your first point dissapear because it suddenly becomes cheaper to move the labour to Mexico or China? Globalization is allowing that to happen! As the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, it becomes increasingly profitable to move jobs overseas. Canada will be left with an entirely knowledge-based economy (we're already well on our way there) and job turnovers will be huge. The average Canadian born in the 90s will work for 11 different companies in 3 or 4 different industries!
| quote: |
- Welfare makes up the LARGEST (yes you heard me, even more than health care and the national debt) chunk of government spending at around 45% of tax dollar revenue (I'll have to check that but I think it's between 40 and 50). Considering that the hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes are far more substantial than the hundreds of millions of dollars taken in by "big business", then yes, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that the vast array of welfare-cheating societal parasites really ARE doing more damage to society as a whole than large corporations, because there are only a few large corporations compared to thousands or even millions of parasites.
|
I'd like to see a source for this, because I've always heard that healthcare was the highest in Canada.
Big business does not take in money on the order of "hundreds of millions." Try several orders of magnitude larger. In America, big business has grown to the point where it has become financially more powerful than the government. The difference is that the government is out to be fair and equal, whereas a business's goal is to line the pockets of its shareholders AT ALL OTHER COSTS. If burning oil, employing Indonesians for 10 cents a day, or poisoning people makes more money than it loses, any corporation is practically forced to go down that route!
| quote: |
And why the would I want to live in Sri Lanka when the USA is just down the road?
|
I was just pointing out that if you think Canada stinks and America is so great, that perhaps you should try living in the countries that suffer because of America's wealth. But... oh right... you're so overpowered by American Nationalism (which Bush thrives off of) that you have no concept of Internationalism. Where are your morals as a global citizen? Do you truly only want to better the life of yourself or a select few million people at the expense of 5 billion others?
The ONLY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD where public opinion polls favour Bush is the USA. Republican, right-wing views can be seen as beneficial for America but are universally seen as being selfish. They help America, not the rest of the planet.
The world's mouth is eating it's own arms and legs. All you seem to want to do is go and support the mouth. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ_Elyot
The ONLY COUNTRY IN THE WORLD where public opinion polls favour Bush is the USA. Republican, right-wing views can be seen as beneficial for America but are universally seen as being selfish. They help America, not the rest of the planet.
The world's mouth is eating it's own arms and legs. All you seem to want to do is go and support the mouth. |
Damn :eyes: :eyes: great post there dude.
Too bad some people wont understand what ur saying and will call you names like being "bias" and such. |
|
|
| crazedcanuck |
RJ, hold the old and new $20 together, they look nothing the same, especially the colour. What you posted are the design templates, not the actual printed bills.
Hold them side by side, in moderate light, and then tell me the new bill is green. It's seafoam @ best, like a bridesmaid dress lol. Include a $5 in the mix, and you'll see the easiness of making the mistake I nearly did. |
|
|
| Cyrus King |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I'm sorry Elyot, but what the is this garbage that you wrote? At first I was just bemused but now I'm really annoyed.
What the HELL does this have to do with any of it? There is NO mention of welfare or public health care in the charter of rights. THOSE THINGS AREN'T "RIGHTS". And most importantly, I don't know why I have to keep saying this, THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS APPLIES TO CITIZENS NOT ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS!
How can you not realize how little sense this makes? In the first sentence you say we NEED an upper, middle and lower class to function (I'm not even going to get into the issue of where you draw the line between those classes and how intrinsically flawed that distinction is in the first place), and then you insist that a society needs to "bridge the gap" between classes, i.e. eliminate the classes altogether!
"Bubble up" economics is communism, and has been proven not to work in a real society, ever. The reason that "the Rich" spend a higher percentage of their money outside Canada is because the most expensive things you can't even get in Canada, like for example a ing MRI. It's not even the USA, we have Canadians going to third-world countries to get medical care because it's just that bad here. But as long as everyone gets the SAME health care, it doesn't matter how ty it is, right? Please... :rolleyes:
The "trickle down" theory has nothing to do with this. I'm not even remotely concerned about how money will make its way to "the poor", because in a "capitalist" society, the poor can easily stop being "the poor" by being productive. That's the fundamental underlying principle of capitalism we're talking about here.
This is the absolute worst propaganda I've ever heard. Good old anti-Americanism. It's ironic how in the Southern states where the "right to bear arms" is held most dear, there is very little crime at all.
Your entire discussion here hinges on the patently incorrect notion that every successful person has to "screw" someone or something to get ahead. That ultimately is based on (a) jealousy, insecurity, and other petty emotions, and (b) the mistaken theory which communism relies upon that there is a finite amount of productivity in any economy. Point (b) was proven wrong hundreds of years ago by Adam Smith.
Oh, okay. As long as THEY AREN'T HAPPY, it's okay for them to be TAKING MY MONEY.
Dear ing lord, read an economics textbook. Let me introduce you to a few points here:
- In several areas of Canada where the primary economy used to be from fishing and farming, their economies flatlined. Now they are thriving because the USA has "sent jobs overseas" to Canada, via several millions jobs at massive call centres.
- Globalization is not "dangerous", and even the raving isolationists in politics have come forward and admitted that things like NAFTA were ultimately good for our country. Even when our dollar value was at an all-time low, "globalization" was STILL good for our country because Americans would spent loads of money buying things in Canada because it was so cheap. Low currency = high tourism = money coming into Canada = good. See how a free market has a way of balancing itself out naturally? We don't need government interference!
- The "90% of American wealth is controlled by less than 1% of the population" is a statistic, nothing more. It has no meaning whatsoever. The 1% are CEOs of massive conglomerates - but why should I care that someone else is making $50 million a year as long as I'm making 7 figures? You act as though this wealth somehow NEEDS to be redistributed, but there's no logical argument you can come up with to support that position. They worked for their money, and it was the desire for profit that motivated them to work and be productive. These same people who control 90% of the wealth are also responsible for 90% of the jobs - if it wasn't for them, then you would be piss-poor broke.
- Welfare makes up the LARGEST (yes you heard me, even more than health care and the national debt) chunk of government spending at around 45% of tax dollar revenue (I'll have to check that but I think it's between 40 and 50). Considering that the hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes are far more substantial than the hundreds of millions of dollars taken in by "big business", then yes, I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that the vast array of welfare-cheating societal parasites really ARE doing more damage to society as a whole than large corporations, because there are only a few large corporations compared to thousands or even millions of parasites.
ME BASH THIS COUNTRY? Buddy, I think you need to gloss over this thread again and see who is really showing the disrespect here. What is your argument here, that we're slightly better off than some 3rd-world countries so we therefore shouldn't complain? And why the would I want to live in Sri Lanka when the USA is just down the road?
Man oh man, the unfettered ignorance is flying high in this thread. Do you write your own material, or did you scoop this out of a typical Left-wing university textbook that spends 10 chapters on Marx and half a page on Smith? |
This post reflects the harsh reality that comes about when people lose all respect for people that need help. Selfish,, you are one selfish rich little brat.
Sip on your wine and play poker with your preppy boys from your ivy league school and keep continuing to criticize the people who want to live a decent life.
makes me sick |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
What makes me sick are all the people who think they are entitled to a hand out just because they were born. Go and work for your money. You know what? People get by easily on $30,000 a year. Sadly we rate "poor" in this country as not being able to go to cancun twice a year. And dont talk to me about the homeless. Most of those people need treatment as they are unfit to function on their own. The politically incorrect term would be crazies. Oh yeah and the runaways that need shelters that they dont use.
There is absolutely no excuse for being homeless in Canada.
I agree pretty much with what diginut has to say. There are some instances where social assistance is necissary such as when you first lose your job, you are disabled physically or mentally, or injured at work.
Otherwise
a) dont have kids unless you can afford to raise them
b) don't make welfare a career. There should be a maximum limit of 6 months with job limitations much like they do with unemployment insurance.
c) don't expect me to be happy when im handing you over my tax dollars so that you can go play bingo. And dont tell me im being stereotypical because i used to volunteer for charities at bingo and "welfare fridays" were our busiest days.
Capitalism isnt perfect but its the best system we know of. Socialism has failed everywhere in the globe and it is failing us in Canada. When I have to wait six months to get a friggin physical there is something wrong. Especially when half of my 65% in taxes goes toward this failed system.
Public funded private care is the best of both worlds. Citizens get universal access like they do now while private companies cut the bureaucratic waste and BS from the system. You see, id rather have a company making a small profit instead of the government wasting huge sums of money on diddley squat. |
|
|
| bass drive |
| quote: | Originally posted by rabbitjoker
CANADIAN JOURNEY SERIES
$5 = blue.
$10 = purple
$20 = green.
$100 = brown
|
the $10 looks the best  |
|
|
|
|
