Boris' pissed off and he's telling you why

[Imran Siddiqui]

Imran's lily-white?

I KNEW Q was drunk at the Poly meet!

[Q Classic]

actually, well, that doesn't make any sense, either.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Are you drunk now?

[Q Classic]

no, i'm perfectly lucid.

i can type if i concentrate on the keyboard.

[Imran Siddiqui]

What about those flying keys?

[Q Classic]

not drunk enough yet to see those.

lemme get a few more drinks.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Chug! Chug! CHUG!

[Tripledoc]

I, as a direct descendant of a forefather who has put me on this poor earth, am a Productive being.

I realize that only through hard work am I capable of achieving God's grace.

That only by being Obedient am I to fulfill that with my brothers.

That Sobriety will keep me on the right path.

That Truthfulness will keep my enemies at bay.

Cleanliness will reward itself multifold.

And by Honesty will I represent my Race.

And by all means of Sacrifice I will defend this Land

Productiveness, Obedience, Sobriety, Truthfulness, Cleanliness, Honesty, Sacrifice, and Love of the Fatherland is the Path to Freedom.

.....

What other Ideals does the Conservative have?

[Tripledoc]

I think they lack Love.

Happy Christmas, and love be upon everyone.

[notyoueither]

Haven't read the whole thread, but you're full of ****, Tripledoc.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

The graph you gave was about GDP growth as a raw number, but not as a per capita one.

Who does GDP GROWTH per capita?! Growth is simply how much did the economy improve. 'per capita' has nothing to do with it.

That has got to be sarcasm.

Let's say there are 7 millions people in Quebec and 11 millions in Ontario. (tall number in these figures are gross estimations).

Per capita, Ontario is 25 000$. So 11 millions x 25 000. So we have got a 275 billions GDP.
Let's say Quebec is at 22 000$. 7 millions x 22 000 is a GDP of 154 billions.

Now, if the graph says that Ontario's GDP increased by 1 billion from a year to another and that Quebec's has increased by 550 millions in the same time, you are obviously talking about similar GROWTH as a percentage. 11 millions people will obviously create more wealth. What you need to know is how the raw number growth amounts when compared to the total number, as to calculate a growth percentage.

Just in case you are not mocking me but are truly dumb:
Take a village of 100 with a GDP of of 200 000$. In a year, it doubles to 400 000$. Now take a city of 10 000 with a GDP of 20 000 000$. In a year it increases to 22 000 000$. Which increase is larger? the 2 millions one or the 200 000$ one?
Please, don't tell me you were serious.

Second point: taking pure GDP growth percentage is still not fair, because the population of Ontario grew faster. New immigrants start at practically 0 and immediately start creating wealth.
If a country received a billion immigrants, but it only increased the GDP by 100 billions, statistics would still show an increase in GDP growth percentage.
The only way to avoid this is to compare PER CAPITA figures, which determine how much wealth per inhabitant has been created.

So no, the only fair comparison is when you take per capita GDP growth percentage and nothing else.

Third point: state regulations in Quebec impose lower rents asked by landlords and maximum prices on some commodities. Therefore, even with less a lesser revenue, Quebecers can enjoy a buying power similar to someone with slightly more money but living somewhere else.
In the case of huge metropolis like London, the difference is enormous. Price differences between London and Montreal range from 50% to 100% and more, even on luxury products

don't tell French Canadians Quebec is not a country. It might be true politically, but many of them certainly feel like having a distinct society, somewhere in a place we call "Heart".

Kind of like the morons in the South who say 'The South shall rise again'?

Since you don't have a clue as to what is Canadian history, French Canadian history, Canadian politics, Quebecois politics and Quebecois culture, I suggest you just shut up on this one. It can only help your reputation.
(In 1995, there was a referendum in Quebec. 49.4% of the population voted for separation).

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
I, as a direct descendant of a forefather who has put me on this poor earth, am a Productive being.

I realize that only through hard work am I capable of achieving God's grace.

That only by being Obedient am I to fulfill that with my brothers.

That Sobriety will keep me on the right path.

That Truthfulness will keep my enemies at bay.

Cleanliness will reward itself multifold.

And by Honesty will I represent my Race.

And by all means of Sacrifice I will defend this Land

Productiveness, Obedience, Sobriety, Truthfulness, Cleanliness, Honesty, Sacrifice, and Love of the Fatherland is the Path to Freedom.

.....

What other Ideals does the Conservative have?

Nice one Tripledoc. As if being "productive" was working all day long, cleaning toilets, writing biased articles for the Washington post, playing in crappy Hollywood movies that have not evolved in 100 years, or creating sucky advertisements telling everyone how great is Ronald McDonald to the world's justice.

[Fake Boris]

Ned, I'll be getting back on your questions with a new thread, but probably after New Year only. (I've spent dozens of hours on this one)

I think I'll be "closing" it soon. Just after I can work out the proposed draw by JohnT

In the meanwhile, if you are really serious in your claims, buying some issues of Le Monde Diplomatique and reading some of Chomsky's works is a good start. There is also Naomi Klein, who might be too biased to my liking, but hell, she can't be worse than FOX news! Even if you're not serious, my references will prove I'm not making anything up!

Now, Chomsky is not a great historian, but the elementary facts are there. You can then use the basics acquired to read some other less pamphlet-inclined historians who will give you a better picture.

I am just finishing Chomsky now, so I am definitely looking to refine my point of view. I have also read a French book describing America's drug policy: I can tell you, it's ugly. The author is referencing to similar American books. If I can get hold how her referencies, I could provide them to you.

It's very hard to provide non-book references, because remembering the exact newspaper or radio broadcast in which you learned something is trying on the memory.

Please, everyone, no such jokes as" Yup Fakeboris, you'd definitely benefit from a refinement of your views".

[Az]

Yup Fakeboris, you'd definitely benefit from a refinement of your views.


come on, dude, you were asking for it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Now, if the graph says that Ontario's GDP increased by 1 billion from a year to another and that Quebec's has increased by 550 millions in the same time, you are obviously talking about similar GROWTH as a percentage. 11 millions people will obviously create more wealth. What you need to know is how the raw number growth amounts when compared to the total number, as to calculate a growth percentage.

Just in case you are not mocking me but are truly dumb:
Take a village of 100 with a GDP of of 200 000$. In a year, it doubles to 400 000$. Now take a city of 10 000 with a GDP of 20 000 000$. In a year it increases to 22 000 000$. Which increase is larger? the 2 millions one or the 200 000$ one?
Please, don't tell me you were serious.

You are an idiot aren't you? GDP Growth IS a percentage increase in GDP! I mean, really, you try to argue things and have no idea what you are arguing about. Uninformed and ignorant is no way to debate, fakeboris.

taking pure GDP growth percentage is still not fair, because the population of Ontario grew faster. New immigrants start at practically 0 and immediately start creating wealth.

Because immigrants aren't any drain at all on services?

So no, the only fair comparison is when you take per capita GDP growth percentage and nothing else.

Have you ever heard of an economist spoeak of GDP growth per capita? Seriously, GDP growth is the only viable measure in discussing economic growth of countries. Whether more or less people were added doesn't matter worth a damn.. because those people are also a drain on the system as they are a gain.

When the US economy grows by 3% and France's grows by 3%, do you ever hear anyone say, but wait, the US had more people coming in, so by GDP growth per capita France had a better year? NO! Because it is silly.

Since you don't have a clue as to what is Canadian history, French Canadian history, Canadian politics, Quebecois politics and Quebecois culture, I suggest you just shut up on this one. It can only help your reputation.
(In 1995, there was a referendum in Quebec. 49.4% of the population voted for separation).

Was it 50% or greater? NO! So I suggest you shut up on this one. Quebec is NOT a country. It has not declared statehood. It has not been recognized by anyone else as a state. The Canadian Supreme Court ruled Quebec could not succeed due to principles of international law.

Quebec is NOT a country and never will be. So I suggest you deal with it and accept that you are just a province of Canada and nothing more .