canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 This is so laughable. I can understand why someone like you would be upset. That you could be a product of being a Canadian and British Columbian and be in your thirties is astonishing given the level of education, maturity, and thoughtfulness you have displayed time and time again. Canada is far from being a utopia but if we lived in such a place you would doubtful be any the wiser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Which is even more pathetic in light of his recent childish behaviour. 51 going on 11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vapourstreak Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 I thought this treament was frowned apon. Guess I was wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 I saw what you posted before you finished and if you're going to try and play hero and defend him let me clarify my point of view. I had no interest in posting here after incidents earlier on in the other thread. It's not a good use of time or energy to argue with people who have already made their minds up and ignore the facts. I felt the urge to post because that poster not only displayed an incredible level of ignorance but also made veiled threats to everyone who opposed the Occupy Vancouver protests. Saying that we would get what's coming and at one point in the other thread wishing I was dead after I made a remark that would have been better left unsaid. I'm not aware of the poster's personal disability if he has one and it made no impact in what I said. Forums like this provide a certain anonymity and we rarely are privy to people's personal status or health and even if he had it made it clear it's wrong to assume everyone would know. The bottom line is not only to I disagree with his point of view but suggesting that people of different opinion to his own "has what's coming to them" is crossing the line and I'm sure must cross the guidelines in the rules of this forum. [/quote Not once did I threaten anyone on this thread. I said, you will get whats coming to you, or in other words , you reap what you sow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyfan87 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 I dare to dream for Canada, You dream about money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 There are alot of grey areas to life. Because a person opposes Occupy Vancouver does not mean they side on X, Y, or Z on any other number of issues. In the end the populace will reap what it sows. What about voter apathy? What percentage of Occupy Vancouver cast a ballot in the municipal election? I don't know the answer to that but I do know that Mayor Dianne Watts was re-elected in Surrey with 12% of the cities support (the media phrasing she won it by a landslide). Our system has inherent flaws, time will tell if they are fatal, but unfortunately Occupy Vancouver did not resonate with the average citizen...it did quite the opposite. We need change and I'm all for it but the change we need is going to look different for every person more or less. To me that was a shortcoming of Occupy Vancouver, the ambiguity worked against it. If the movement had one message which was less corruption that would be something that everyone from all political sides could get on board with and something the politicians wouldn't dare oppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyfan87 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 If you read my sugestion correctly you would see that I wrote about a series of tests to see where you would be best suited to serve Canada for a period of time predetermend by a public vote. No where did I say anything about the gov,t placing people in gov't positions. These tests would be administered by trained phsycologists looking for personality traits that would detrimental to the Canadian Gov't. I also said that the people chosen by the people Via random draft veary simaler to jury duty. If you can be responsible for a persons fate, then you should be responsible enough for gov't positions. These chosen few would be well rewarded for their sacrifice for doing a job that most people woundn't touch. For the record I didn't say all lawyers are corrupt. Just a large majority in corporate and gov't law. If you think you can bring about changes in a gov,t as firmly entrenched as the conservatives with out geting heavy handed , Good luck. I would like to clarify that by Lie detectors all around, I meant that in order to keep your Gov't job you would have to submit to a lie detector with a predetermined set of questions to root out corruption. The same way the police do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Meh; we're all guilty of it at one time or another. You just happen to want to get back on topic here; which is probably a good idea. Seriously though...he is looney and we should all stop talking about him. We're all wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Not once did I threaten anyone on this thread. I said, you will get whats coming to you, or in other words , you reap what you sow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 my friend with a PhD in mechanical and bio engineering! well thats what he got assigned to him by the random draft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyfan87 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 If people had a choice other that the three stooges of Canadian political parties, I'm sure there would be ba lot less voter apathy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 No, just job equity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 So is making your assumptions about people's mentality, beliefs, etc. public on this forum.. ^ But to your previous post, how would a lie detector test positively identify all corrupt people? What would "corrupt" mean in that kind of society? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vapourstreak Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Corruption = anything detrimental to Canada and it's people as a whole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hockeyfan87 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Corruption = anything detrimental to Canada and it's people as a whole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Then explain to me how service jobs will be handled under your new totalitarian system of government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Nice slogan but void of any meaning or value like everything else you've said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vapourstreak Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Not tolatarianism, Just corruption free at the highest levels in Canada And hey, I'm no sociologist! I'm just making broad suggestions. I did ask for help but got shot down. But, isn't suggesting ideas the place to start? You takie the good ideas and trash the rest. If my ideas are all trash, so be it. Lets start over with some fresh ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks since 77 Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 This idea of using lie detectors just shows how ill informed you are about not only the subject in general but your very own suggestions about improving it. Lie detectors can be beaten, it's commonly known, and aren't reliable. For those very reasons they are not admissible as evidence in court rooms. Knowing that it makes zero sense to use them on individuals seeking roles in government as any sort of reliable measure of their integrity or qualification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vapourstreak Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Then why do police dept's. use them to prejudge whether you are guilt or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.