Andrewwhyte

The fact is most that have regular banking services will do the one free transaction to move the money from their unemployment card to their regular current accounts. The people who do not have regular bank accounts will not. These people are generally a dead loss to banks. The province of British Columbia set up a "Peoples" bank for those who didn't have regular banking access in the worst neighbourhood of Vancouver many years ago. Not even the socialist government of the day could continue to fund it for long. Banks are in business to make money. I don't know why people should expect them to behave any differently.

Now that's funny, that right there, I don't care who you are.

Except Rome threatened a US public official (Pelosi) with sanction this week.

About a hundred dollars.

The easiest example is if you are driving drunk and I run a red light. Do I get a pass because you are drunk, even though you were otherwise driving safely?

Former Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien wrote a memoir many years ago in which he talks about the political actions of the church in Quebec in the '50s. The two major parties were generally known as les Bleus (Union Nationale) and les Rouges (liberals). The Archbishop gave a sermon a sermon the Sunday before one election pronouncing that heaven is BLEU whereas hell is ROUGE. When Chretien's father (a liberal) confessed to buying votes the local priest told him his sin was so treacherous he would have to confess it to the Archbishop in order to receive communion on Easter. In a small town where virtually everyone goes to mass on Easter not receiving communion would have been a severe social censure. Now take one more step and think about the power Imams have in societies where almost everyone is Muslim. Iran comes to mind. try taking a position against the Ayatollahs there. Are there any Catholics on the SCOTUS? Is everyone OK with them taking orders from Rome on mandatory interpretations of the constitution?

Well that would be a good argument to never vote for a Catholic. I don't belong to any organization that will expel me for my political behavior.

Yes, you are, but why are you striking every thing?

Yep. The fifteenth century was a fine period. No reason not to recreate it today.

They are entitled to equal access to them within the delivery constraints (budgets) approved by the legislative branch.

Oh, I don't know. Maybe some of the money that they currently use for advertising -- nearly twice the money that they spend for research. Source Wendy W. So you think if they have to convince government officials rather than doctors they will spend less? I only wish that were true.

That is more than voicing discontent, it is issuing imperatives,... ...and threats.

Okay, how many times do you need to be told people: if it's a kit it will not work; it will just amplify the mind control rays. Who do think makes the kits? You have to make it all yourself.

When JFK was running for president people asked whether the country would be subject to undue influence from the Holy See. Last year similar questions were posed about Mitt Romney's candidacy wrt the LDS. These arguments have been largely discounted as paranoia by most. Not so fast! Pope tells Pelosi: Catholics cannot back abortion

The line between entitlement and right, if it exists, tends to blur this question. A right is something you inherently have unless it is taken from you. Medical care, like food, may simply be absent. If medical care is a right then doctors do not have the right to go home if there are people waiting, and there are always people waiting. If an entitlement is something different then it must be an obligation of the government to provide. I think expecting the government to provide any service as an entitlement is crazy. Are we entitled to police services, or are we entitled to police services within the constraints of the budget? If it is the former then the courts can order the state to increase the budget if certain areas can demonstrate that police services are not present in significant quantities to render a crime rate comparable to the country at large. Likewise if healthcare is an entitlement then the courts can and will order the governments to provide. This is always a dangerous situation. The United States has government supplied health care today. The question should not be weather people are entitled to it or not; it should be whether society will be improved by increasing the scope of it. The question is not so different than the ones being asked in Canada. We ask weather dental care should be covered for children, whether alternative medicine should be covered and how it should be rationed (coverage, not availability). You ask weather it should be more widely available. Looking at the discussion here it is sad because people line up on their red or blue side of the field and construct their arguments from there. Yes Mike there are people that die waiting for treatment in Canada. There was one in British Columbia three years ago that I remember. I am sure there have been more. It happens in the states too, it just isn't news. The truth is I know more people who have died in Afghanistan, I know more people who have died skydiving, I know more people who have died in plane crashes, car crashes, various other ways of dieing, than I do who have died (0) or suffered serious health consequences due to health care rationing in Canada. TK you didn't tell us how long your mother waited for her new knees, I know I waited longer for my non-critical surgery than I would have if I had the money or private insurance to go to the States for it. The truth is health care costs as a function of our ability to pay are spiraling out of control. The private insurer system is failing an increasing number of people, the public insurer system is threatening our governments' ability to provide other needed services. It looks like the Americans are going to move towards a larger public component. I think those on the right would serve their own interests to try to shape the changes rather than rail against them.

All you can teach them is slider up stowed terminal deployments. Not jumps, as you cant simulate dead air out of an aircraft unless its a balloon or helicopter. And for one, i can tell you 95% of my BASE jumps are not terminal and most are low, slider off hand held freefalls. Meaning packing is not even close to the same as it is for terminal. Why not get a BASE canopy, an old student container and save a fucking huge fortune. Usually when people want to learn to fly their base canopy they whine and snivel until the dzo lets them take a student rig out of service, usually for longer than they promised.

No problem. In fact I would love to have one around to use as a training aid for those who wish to start base jumping.

TSO's on parachute gear stipulate maximum opening speed. They in no way restrict the speed jumpers are allowed to travel before they use the parachute. Violations only occur on premature deployments.

I believe the FAA suggests that. I'm having trouble finding the FAR section that allows "stunts". You are correct. I am glad my government does not meddle in my affairs in this particular form.

I think $6-7 Canadian/load is probably ballpark. I would ask for gas money as well. Since you are at a club you should expect to be at the lower end of the scale.

http://www.spco.ca/ I misspoke when I said he was expelled for base jumping; according to the article he was expelled for talking about base jumping. Bill is still banned from the CSPA, and has gone on in life to become a biblical prophet. Get your things in order.

Authorities were preparing for collision in the Calgary area a couple of days ago. http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20090213/CGY_space_junk_090213/20090213/?hub=CalgaryHome Maybe Bill is right.

Of course it applies. A glut is the mechanism the market uses to reduce prices when demand falls below supply. No market is ever in true equilibrium just as the sea never is. The oil market is always in a momentary glut or shortage, this one is just a bit larger and taking a bit longer to correct. Suppliers are large operations and so take some time to correct. Here in Alberta service wells are starting to shut down, but they generally have contracts to complete first so it is not a day to day thing. OPEC nations co-ordinate production decisions so it is even slower to react. The supply-demand relationship is exactly what is driving prices.

Skydiving and stunts are not the same thing. Are you suggesting that these people should not be allowed to perform these stunts? Should race car drivers be charged with dangerous driving? This is the kind of thinking that got Bill Cole banned from CSPA for base jumping in the 70s.

CRW comes to mind.