Vineon is not writing in joual but in perfect French. As for the idea that "nations" are getting together... Yes and the entire E.U. project is a catastrophic failure that has robbed nations of the tools necessary to defend themselves against an economic and immigration disaster.
Yes take a few years willham95, and we will discuss again the virtues of nations "coming together", when France, Holland, UK and Russia have become Muslim states. We will do it in Arabic too, God willing!
Quebecers should be happy that they lost the vote because if they left Canada, they'd have been fucked
Tons of people would've left and what would Quebec do without all the Ottawa payments to them? Quebec definitely needs Canada more than Canada needs Quebec, although I'm happy they stayed.
Highly exagerated are those payments. If Québec receives a certain amount more than it contributes to, it is little money. When considered spendings that Canada makes that Québec wouldn't, the gap is quite easily breached. Wars overseas come to mind, the highly costly bill to insure northern sovereignty comes to mind, bilingualism coast to coast comes to mind.
Did you know the referendums are illegal? The Constitution prohibits both annexation and secession, it was designed that way in 1865 by the Founding Fathers. The legislative powers were divided between the Federal Parliament and the Provincial Legislatures. The provinces received an "enumerated" list of powers under s. 92. "Enumerated" means they can't do anything that isn't on the list. There is DELIBERATELY no power to secede. There thus can be NO REFERENDUM on the subject of secession.
And Vineon, read ALL my answers before foolishly responding. Although you make me laugh at some point in this boring debate (I get bored when all I do is win), I'd like to have an adult conversation.
And Vineon, don't be offended. Your language is what it is. English in North America is much more similar to the English of England than is the Quebec-joual to the standard French of France and Switzerland. Nonetheless, I personally know MANY people in London who find North American English distasteful and unrefined. I laugh.
A limited unilingual fool such as yourself should avoid the topic of languages. Especially if you want to talk about mine, which you don't speak and which you have no fucking understanding of.
That you show me a video of a woman that speaks perfect pitched french, but with an Québec accent, and call it "joual" is beyond ridiculous. It's as if I were a British watching an American newscast and called it "harlem ghetto slang".
@Vineon you're right... I certainly don't speak your "language" hahahahahahaha! Quebec-joual (I don't think people were praising the accent as much as they were mocking it. Most of those comments could be interpreted as very condescending) ;-) I know more about economics than you, I think anyone reading this would come to that conclusion. "Gdp per capita" "net debt" etc... keep fooling yourself. LOL.
You said : " (I don't think people were praising the accent as much as they were mocking it. "
Of course you don't : you can't even read them. The difference is I can and most of them were praising them, including the brazilian fellow that actually put online the goddamn video.
Moreoever, it isn't joual. If you want joual, listen to a sitcom like La Petite Vie.
@Vineon FYI, I know damn well what joual is ;-) I'm using the term to mock what you feel is French. I get a kick out of seeing how DESPERATELY you try (and fail) to make any kind of dent in my sound arguments. I like mocking you and seeing you react. Yeah yeah yeah, I know I'm sick, but it is what it is. It's kind of like when insecure Canadians get their knickers in a knot over the American term "Canadia." Every American knows it's Canada, but they use "Canadia" to get a rise out of people.
Vous dites : " FYI, I know damn well what joual is"
Haha. Clairement pas. Vous avez vous-même admis plusieurs fois ne pas comprendre le français. Comment pouvez-vous espérer maintenant en comprendre les nuances? L'extrait que vous m'avez montré, supposément contenant du 'joual', n'en était pas.
Vous dites : " I see my jokingly used "joual"
Vous changez votre fusil d'épaule, comme un pleutre, vous rendant compte que votre rhétorique sur le français québécois puait l'ignorance.
@Vineon You have no choice but to learn English and speak it. You'd sink pretty damn fast if you refused to learn the most important language in the history of the world. The fact that you have resorted to writing in Quebec-joual is an admission of defeat (you obviously have nothing relevant to say). I asked for an adult conversation and as per your type's usual bad form, you unsurprisingly have resorted to playing games. Clearly, I have gotten to you (pat on the back for me).
Le Québec est l'état le plus bilingue d'Amérique du Nord mais l'apprentissage de l'anglais m'y est certainement pas automatique. La majorité n'est pas bilingue. Il n'est pas étonnant que vous ne compreniez pas les efforts nécessaires à l'apprentissage d'une langue seconde, étant unilingue vous-même.
Mon français écrit n'est certainement pas du 'joual', vous n'avez d'ailleurs toujours aucune notion de ce que ce terme signifie.
@Vineon And Vineon, even if Quebec were the LOWEST recipient of transfer payments, fact is -- IT RECEIVES THEM (no matter how small). Any region receiving money from another is dependent upon the donating region (again, no matter how small the transfers actually are). This is a FACT. The other provinces receiving transfer payments are irrelevant to this discussion because they are not threatening separation. Quebec, while dependent on ANY transfers, is simply NOT worthy of independence. Fact.
Vous dites : "even if Quebec were the LOWEST recipient of transfer payments, fact is -- IT RECEIVES THEM (no matter how small)"
Votre ignorance crasse transparait encore une fois. Toutes les provinces reçoivent un certain montant en transferts fédéraux aux provinces d'Ottawa. Si c'est de la péréquation dont vous voulez parler, faites-y allusion correctement.
@Vineon Fool, other provinces have never seriously threatened separation. The fact that ALL provinces may or may not have received federal transfers is irrelevant because that's the price ALL countries pay for remaining united (there are ALWAYS wealthier regions helping out less wealthy regions). The equation changes, however, when you have a whining province like Quebec (Maxime Bernier even alluded to this) receiving payments YET threatening separation. NOT WORTHY OF INDEPENDENCE! PERIOD.
@Vineon In fact, two other "experts" (Barry Cooper and David Bercuson, a born and bred Quebecker himself... HA HA!) say Quebec doesn't even really have any claim to the entire south shore of the St. Lawrence. What do you say to that? Are they idiots and ignoramuses, too? You're naive if you assume Quebec will peacefully drift off into nationhood because of everything YOU FEEL (there is NO FACT to what you say) is true. You REALLY need to open your mind, dude.
"In fact, two other "experts" (Barry Cooper and David Bercuson, a born and bred Quebecker himself... HA HA!) say Quebec doesn't even really have any claim to the entire south shore of the St. Lawrence."
C'est une farce j'espère. Premièrement, mes experts sont internationaux et maîtres en droit international, vos experts sont Canadiens Anglais, de toute évidence extrêmement biaisés.
@Vineon you saying that you never said otherwise to my statement that "other provinces have never threatened separation" is nothing more than twisting of what you know I mean... Quebec, while receiving federal transfer payments, IS NOT WORTHY OF INDEPENDENCE. Period. Forget Quebec's "dependence" on equalization payments (are you actually saying that Quebec could continue to fund its obligations WITHOUT federal transfers from Ottawa? SHIT FOR BRAINS)...
" Quebec, while receiving federal transfer payments, IS NOT WORTHY OF INDEPENDENCE."
Vous n'avez toujours pas compris la différence entre les transferts fédéraux (transfer payments) et la péréquation (equalization). Des transferts fédéraux, toutes les provinces en reçoivent, de la plus riche à la moins riche.
@Vineon Anyway, I'm on the winning team (that's all that really matters). Everything I've presented is irrelevant (though much less so than the garbage you spew from your ignorant and blind body) because NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE IN QUEBEC SUPPORT INDEPENDENCE. HEAR THAT? UNDERSTAND THAT? YOU SIMPLY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SUPPORTERS! PERIOD. And that really is the crux of all this. That alone invalidates ALL of your hypothetical "arguments" (horseshit).
C'est vrai qu'une majorité rejette présentement l'indépendance mais ça n'en invalide pas les arguments. Autrement, il faudrait y comprendre que les arguments contre l'esclavagisme et le vote pour les femmes étaient invalides lorsque ceux-ci ne parvenaient pas à rejoindre la majorité.
@Vineon ...while Quebec receives ANY money from Ottawa (and thus Canada), the threat of separation can HARDLY be taken seriously. If Quebec truly sent more money to Ottawa than it receives back, Quebec would be a "have" province (in the same league as Alberta and Saskatchewan). QUEBEC IS A HAVE NOT PROVINCE (meaning it receives MORE money than it sends)! Period. You cannot twist that. Also, still waiting to hear why Ireland is in more trouble than the UK despite having lower "net debt."
" Also, still waiting to hear why Ireland is in more trouble than the UK despite having lower "net debt.""
J'attends la source. Vous avez déjà démontré ne pas savoir la différence entre la dette brute et la dette nette d'un état. Je n'ai pas trouvé vos chiffres alors montrez les moi.
@Vineon do you have any idea what is going on in Ireland right now? Wow,"figures"? You're a blabbering idiot. Read the news. Still waiting for an equal debate. 1. Quebec is divisible. 2. Quebec is a HAVE-NOT province (the only have provinces in Canada right now are, BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland). This means Quebec IS dependent on federal transfers (to the tune of 7.5+ BILLION a year). 3. It's very difficult to debate someone who insists on speaking a dialect, Quebec joual ;-)
Le français écrit Québécois est exactement le même que celui utilisé en France. Il n'existe pas de différences grammaticales comme ceux qu'on peut observer entre l'espagnol parlé en Espagne et celui parlé en Amérique du Sud. Même l'anglais utilisé en Angleterre versus celui utilisé aux États-Unis démontre davantage de différences, à l'écrit, que le Français Québécois versus celui de la France.
Si le français parlé Québécois est dialecte, l'est autant votre anglais nord-américain.
Les paiements de péréquations ne représentent pas la différence entre ce que le Québec reçoit et ce qu'il envoie à Ottawa. Ce 7.5 millions est donc à relativiser. Si le Québec reçoit davantage en péréquation, il reçoit moins dans divers autres transferts fédéraux, notamment en transferts aux entreprises et en recherche et développement.
@Vineon Ireland's net debt is LOWER than the UKs, yet it's economy is substantially worse off. Explain this. 99.9% of people don't need a "source" to understand this. Net debt is NOT everything in the eyes of international investors. Just last week, Moodys mentioned the "low threat" of Quebec separation when renewing Canada's AAA credit rating (OBVIOUSLY Quebec separation would be VERY unfavourable to the economy).
Puis-je en voir les chiffres? Évidemment, une comparaison par habitant s'imposera immédiatement. Pas certain que vous avez pensé faire ces simples calculs, pourtant nécessaire à la compréhension.
@Vineon And yes... Ireland's net debt is lower than the UK's (DESTROYS your theory that all international investors look at is net debt, considering Ireland is in much more economic danger than the United Kingdom), and YES, nations and regions ARE coming together (hence the EXTREME CONCERN for PRESERVING the Eurozone and E.U in general, the Canada-US security perimeter, etc -- YOU HAVE SHIT FOR BRAINS).
"And yes... Ireland's net debt is lower than the UK's "
Par habitant? Faut-il vous expliquer qu'il serait plutôt normal qu'un état ayant 10 fois la taille de l'autre ait une dette plus importante en nombre absolu sans que son poids sur ses habitant y soit relativement plus imposant?
Le reste de votre commentaire n'est qu'un 'speak white' mettant bien en lumière votre crasseux racisme.
@Vineon Do you think Ottawa had something to do with Moodys' mentioning of Quebec? Maybe Ottawa instructed the ratings agency to "scare" Quebeckers. LOL (that's how stupid your mentality is). You need to understand that your quest for independence would accomplish nothing of tangible economic value for Quebec (it would benefit Canada in the long run, however, so I'm all for it). At a time when nations and regions are coming together, you seem to want the opposite (again, SHIT FOR BRAINS).
"At a time when nations and regions are coming together"
Pourtant, ce n'est pas la réalité. Depuis la deuxième guerre mondiale, il y a pratiquement maintenant près de 4 fois plus d'états indépendants qu'il y en avait à l'époque.
Certainement, des accords économiques existent en plus grand nombre mais aucun des pays constituants ne remettra sa pleine souveraineté en doute.
Accepteriez-vous, dans cette grande dynamique de regroupement, que le Canada devienne un état américain?
@Vineon I don't speak Quebec joual trash. When you're ready to debate me in English -- the language of international business and commerce, aviation, and widely accepted as the most important language IN THE WORLD -- I'll talk to you. I guess even a month off for you didn't do much to improve your cognitive functioning. Maybe take a few years off before getting back to me again, loser. I didn't read your month-long "rebuke." As soon as I saw "pourtant, ce n'est pas..." I thought "QUEBEC JOUAL."
@Vineon And contrary to your assertions, Quebec IS dependent on federal transfers. If it were not ... IT WOULDN'T RECEIVE THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE! PERIOD! TRY TO UNDERSTAND THIS FRUSTRATINGLY SIMPLE CONCEPT!!! If a region takes even 1 dollar from another region, IT CLEARLY REQUIRES THAT 1 DOLLAR! TO ARGUE OTHERWISE IS LAUGHABLE. GROW UP!
Vous dites : " And contrary to your assertions, Quebec IS dependent on federal transfers."
C'est faux. Le Québec reçoit environ 27% des transferts fédéraux pour 24% de la population. La manque à gagner, environ deux milliards, est aisément comblé par certaines dépenses Canadienne dont le Québec n'a pas besoin.
Le Québec, par exemple, n'aurait probablement pas commandé pour 30 milliards de nouveaux avions de chasse. Le Québec devra pourtant payer environ 6 milliards à lui seul pour ceux-ci.
Le Québec n'aurait pas à payer le milliard qu'il paie annuellement pour le maintien de la souveraineté du nord Canadien. Il n'y aurait plus d'argent gaspillé dans le bilinguisme 'coast to coast' et le dédoublement des technocracies.
@Vineon I would ABSOLUTELY respect a 50% + 1 vote on secession from Canada (I feel Quebeckers have every right to determine their future). But you too must accept a 50% + 1 vote from ANYONE (natives, Montreal, etc) who chooses to secede from Quebec and either remain apart of or rejoin Canada. And yes, Quebec IS divisible contrary to separatist and soft-nationalist--but not separatist (Jean Charest)--claims (MORE hypocrisy from Quebeckers).
@Vineon Remember, France abandoned New France (Quebec) in favour of its Guadeloupe and Martinique colonies. Apparently sugar cane was more important than you (umm... err... *cough cough* HAHAHAHAHAHA). You're living in a dream world if you think the sophisticated and admirable French give two fucks about your irrelevant and declining province. Give it up, bud. It's time to focus on other things like your bloated bureaucracy and sluggish economy (and many separatists are starting to get this).
@Vineon It took you a week to come up with more Quebec joual garbage? Hahahaha... I see you obviously needed the break. Bottom line is, Quebec is divisible regardless of what authors claim (you really are a fool to claim that support for the concept of Quebec divisibility falls along linguistic lines ... SHIT FOR BRAINS). The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that, like Canada, Quebec is divisible. And that's really all that matters.
Ce n'est pas du joual et vous n'en comprenez toujours pas d'ailleurs la signification.
Je cite des experts en droit internationaux et vous rejetez leurs conclusions. Bien à vous mais n'insinuez quand même pas être davantage crédible qu'eux. Pour utiliser un terme que vous comprendrez aussitôt : vous ête un nobody.
Troisièmement, l'immense majorité des pays occidentaux déjà indépendants recevrait de la péréquation dans une fédération Canadienne, n'ayant pas la force vive économique des provinces Canadiennes productrices de pétrole. Qui serait assez con pour insinuer qu'elles ne sont pas, en conséquence, "dignes" de l'indépendance? Vous, bien entendu.
@Vineon and again, switching to QUEBEC JOUAL HORSESHIT is nothing more than another of your petty games. I'm waiting for an adult conversation, yet you prefer to write in your insignificant and entirely laughable dialect -- a dialect you have the nerve to insultingly call "French." This is symbolic of your jingoistic retreat into your dark and lonely trench (aka. you've got NOTHING else to say, so you figured you'd "RESORT" to Quebec joual). HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Urgh... SHIT for brains.
Mon français écrit, très international, n'a rien du 'joual'. Vous ne savez d'ailleurs même pas ce qu'est le joual de toute façon. Non, le joual n'est pas le simple 'accent Québécois'. D'ailleurs, à l'écrit, vous n'y noterez évidement aucun accent. Le reste de votre commentaire frôle le racisme et ne mérite même pas que j'y fasse allusion.
Vous semblez bien fier d'être limité à l'unilinguisme.
@Vineon BTW, I don't just speak one language. I will never lower myself to the garbage you feel is French though, correct. Still waiting for my adult conversation btw.
Vous dites : "BTW, I don't just speak one language. I will never lower myself to the garbage you feel is French though, correct. Still waiting for my adult conversation btw."
Bien amusant.
On rabaisse ma langue et prétend ensuite vouloir converser entre adultes. Le problème, c'est qu'il n'y en a qu'un ici. Une conversation entre adultes, je serai bien content d'en avoir une lorsque vous atteindrez ce stade.
Le Québec a des économies d'échelle importantes à faire en se débarrassant d'un gouvernement qui ne dépense pas selon ses intérêts. L'argent québécois injecté dans la guerre en Afghanistan, par exemple. Au final, l'argent que le Québec reçoit en retour d'Ottawa est aisément compensé par une meilleure utilisation de toutes nos taxes, selon les priorités propres au Québec.
@uglybitch49 Your ignorance is truly shocking. According to Statistics Canada, the IMF, and even the Montreal Gazette, Quebec's debt to GDP ratio is the highest of all Canadian provinces (and the highest in North America). Quebec's input per capita (ie productivity) is also among the LOWEST in this country and indeed the continent (this makes Quebec's debt situation particularly worrisome). I bet if you finished grade 7, you'd know all this. Moral of the story, kids: STAY IN SCHOOL.
You're talking about the gross debt, which makes no distinction between countries with a lot of assets and countries with very few of them. For a country with several assets, a higher debt is a given, as would a mortgage on an individual.
A much better comparison to make, is one of net debts (gross debt minus assets), which classifies Québec's debt as a bit lower than the OECD average.
No, they don't teach you this in grade 7. Moral of the story : go a bit beyond high school.
@Vineon I just returned from a trip to la belle province and guess who I spoke too? Many native leaders (including Cree and Mohawk) who said "no matter what" -- they would ALWAYS vote to remain within Canada. They all spoke English, signs on all their reserves are in English only, and there were even a few Canadian flags fluttering off the balconies of some homes. This stuff must really hurt to hear, huh? Also, the PQ is in major damage control mode right now! LOL enjoy.
First off, I don't believe you. Oh I kind of agree that the Mohawks are a long shot from voting for Québec independence, they've always been the most opposed to it. Moreover, they speak english (so do the Cree, although in their case, as a secondary language after their own).
I don't think the Mohawks can be brought to our side but I believe the Cree people can be, as can the Abenaki, the Inuits, the Innus, the Hurons and the others.
But what I don't believe is the funny event in which you chanced upon native Crees and Mohawks at the same time. It's probably worth noting they don't really live next to each other. And you didn't chance upon few of them outside their communities but you chanced upon 'leaders', apparently. What a load of bullshit.
I dont believe for one single second that the Cree were flaunting Canadian flags.
@Vineon So your theory that Quebec can "outspend" Canada and thus win the favour of aboriginals is wrong. Also, judging by the number of Canadian flags flying on reserve lands and even on some private homes -- it would seem aboriginals actually like and feel "loyal" to CANADA ;-) Aboriginal inclusion in the 2010 Olympic games in Vancouver also increased feelings of aboriginal belonging and loyalty to Canada. Face it, independence is out of the question for the province of Quebec.
It's not a theory, it's very simple maths. Québec spends more than its share on the Indian Affairs budget because it only owns 10% of the aboriginal Canadian population.
Unlike you, I can properly mount arguments without trying to spread the belief I went to the chieftain's hut and discussed politics with them. Laughable.
@Vineon I never said Mokawks and Crees live next to each other. I also don't care what Quebec's "budget" is... I have read reports that suggest that without the Canadian taxpayer, Quebec would be the next Greece or Portugal. Quebec has the lowest productivity yet highest debt in North America. This is an irrefutable fact. Most natives know this and thus will choose to remain a part of Canada. If you're so sure otherwise, why don't you talk to them yourself? Have you? NOPE!
"Reports" you've heard that have Québec and Greece on the same foothold are beyond ridiculous. Find them and report back what is the core of their arguments so that we can have one of our own.
Québec does have a higher debt but with it a higher number of assets, why is this never taken into consideration? It isn't true for instance that a person with a $100,000 mortgage on a house is more indebted than someone with a $80,000 casino debt.
@Vineon You should understand, international investors don't care about "assets." Greece has tons of "assets" and that certainly isn't helping it, is it? Investors look for political stability and economic stability. THAT'S IT! It is no coincidence that with the election of the PQ, Quebec (Montreal) went from being the economic powerhouse of Canada to a third rate backwater (behind Ontario and the West). Your twisted and convoluted (MINORITY) views are as old as your mentality itself. Grow up.
You said : "You should understand, international investors don't care about "assets.""
Of course they do. Considering assets have value, they are always taken into consideration. Assets may count as a mean to pay the debt. I go back to my guy with a mortgage of 100,000 on a house. He's not into the same mess as that person with 80,000 of casino debt. He has a house, which has a value. The guy's casino debts do not have any value.
@Vineon What you don't agree with, you simply discount as being "untrue" (my discussions with native elders as part of my co-op study, for example). And that is probably the most pathetic element of discussing any of this with you. Do you seriously believe I would come on here and "lie"? You do, and that speaks to lack of character and unwillingness to see ANYTHING apart from your convoluted and twisted views. Remember, Quebec voted TWICE to STAY in Canada and according to polls, theyd do it agn
A study? Did it perhaps spawn academic papers because I'd love to see them. Something must have spawned from this "study" right? You have a golden chance to prove these meetings between you and them took place, I'll be waiting for it.
But we both know you won't be interested in showing proofs. It is a bit difficult to prove that something that never happened did happen.
I don't believe for one second that you recently met Cree and Mohawk leaders and discussed Quebec issues
@Vineon again, I couldn't care less what you "believe." EVERYONE knows that your type discount ANYTHING that can even be perceived as detrimental to your convoluted cause as "lies" and "untrue." I find you laughable. Forget about the Cree and Mohawks, why don't you use your little brain and read up on what Konrad Sioui (grand chief Quebec huron) said to William and Kate on their embarrassing visit to Quebec: "We are so happy to see you here. You represent the TRUE ESSENCE of ... C A N A D A"
I don't discount anything I perceive as detrimental but I certainly discount extremely unlikely and unverifiable events such as that conversation you had with Cree and Mohawks leaders. I don't even have a clue why you even thought for one second that it would sound believable.
You said it was part of an academic project. Why can't you show me anything about it???
@Vineon I used the word intangible and questionable because "assets" mean different things to different people (certainly to international investors anyway). If you're so sure that the international community is fine with an independent Quebec, WHY DID MONTREAL LOSE ITS STATUS AS CANADA'S PARAMOUNT CENTRE FOR FINANCE AND BUSINESS? I can assure you, without Canada, Quebec IS the next Greece, Portugal, UK, or United States.
Assets simply are everything that has any value controlled by the government. Have you ever asked for a loan in your personal life? Your assets WILL be taken into consideration. The bank will want to know if it has any way to get its money back if difficulties arise.
"If you're so sure that the international community is fine with an independent Quebec"
You strike again. I'm sick to fucking hell to have you attribute me things I haven't said. My take has always been that the "international community", especially the business one, is much more comfortable with the status quo.
You said : "WHY DID MONTREAL LOSE ITS STATUS AS CANADA'S PARAMOUNT CENTRE FOR FINANCE AND BUSINESS?"
Two things :
1) Ottawa's desire to move it to Toronto. They tampered with the St-Lawrence river to make facilitate access to Toronto. If they hadn't, Montréal would still yet be today Canada's business pole.
@Vineon HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... Ottawa's desire to move finance to Toronto from Montreal? AHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Ok... you REALLY don't understand anything do you? Unlike Quebec, English Canadians prefer to leave matters of business to the private sector. English people are naturally entrepreneurial.
"Ottawa's desire to move finance to Toronto from Montreal? "
Of course. Ever even since the merge of the lower and higher Canada was that made very clear. One of the main reason for the merge was to have Lower Canada's benefits pay for the the other's debt.
2) Québec's initiatives to make Montréal a completely french city and the threat of separation. Keep in mind that the business sector of Montréal, back then, was mostly english only. All that changed is that many simply changed city.
Sioui also presented the Prince with a framed copy of a 1760 agreement between the Huron and ... THE BRITISH CROWN. Trust me pal, these people are NOT separatists and no matter how much you try to reassure yourself: they will NEVER be won over. Your grandiose assumptions of Quebec's importance to Toronto are inflated and false. Basically what you're saying is Quebec (a province with a shrinking population of 7+ million) has done more for Canada than vice versa. LAUGHABLE. Keep on dreaming.
Konrad Sioui is a tool and is about as much a native as I am. The guy is like 1/8 native and only speaks french. As do all the Huron-Wendat, I guess. They are certainly amongst the least native of the natives.
Also, many of them (unlike say Mohawks) are already Québec sovereignists.
@Vineon But I say separate (too bad the majority of Quebeckers don't want to). Quebec will be worse off and Canada will be better off. I sometimes wonder how things might have been different had the British not been gentlemen with regard to their conquest of Quebec (The Quebec Act, for example). They should have imposed English on you joual jokes and deported ANYONE who didn't meaintain allegiance to England (all of which was standard practice at the time).
Oh yeah that thing that lasted a decade because the Brits were deadly scared we would join the Americans in their revolution? Good example. Do you have more like that? Does Québec still own the Great Lakes area??
What I speak is french, which you likely do not even understand. Joual is a simple term for the Quebec argot. Argots (slang) exist in every region. Parisian slang certainly isn't much better.
@Vineon GDP per capita means NOTHING *when determining the creditworthiness of a state.* GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD! Ireland and the United States are EXCELLENT examples of this. GO STUDY ECONOMICS. Quebec is an economic FAILURE (high debt, high taxes, low productivity, and a population that seems increasingly likely to LEAVE the PROVINCE). You don't get this (or refuse, I'm undecided). YOU ARE A FOOL (but thanks again for the laugh).
Québec's net debt, while larger than the North American average, is just below the OECD average. It is problematic but nothing that resembles the debt of the most indebted European countries, which you compare it with. Québec's yearly deficit is under control, it's actually much lower than Ontario's atm, in a time where all provinces (including Alberta) are scoring deficits.
@Vineon the only reason you like "net debt" is because it APPEARS to give a better impression of the true story. Fact is, Ireland's NET DEBT (lower than its gross debt) hasn't saved it from economic meltdown (and at $51,500, its GDP per capita is substantially higher than Quebec's). Same with Greece, its NET DEBT hasn't done it any favours. So what the hell is your point? Again, investor's DO NOT look at "assets." WTF? They look at credit ratings, TOTAL DEBT, GDP growth, debt-to-GDP, etc.
You said : "deported ANYONE who didn't meaintain allegiance to England (all of which was standard practice at the time)."
They did with the Acadians. About 2/3 of them died as a result, something that should be considered an ethnicide. Thrilling that you believe it the way to go. Quite a crassy human being, you are.
@Vineon I love that you continue to IGNORE what is detrimental to your cause and exaggerate what you feel you can successfully twist. FAIL (of epic proportions too) What has Toronto ever done for Quebec? Easy -- it's something called "EQUALIZATION." LOL. Your grandiose assumptions that Toronto "depends" on the St. Lawrence waterway is laughable and speaks to your insular and HIGHLY misinformed character. Toronto's #1 industry is finance buddy.
You argue like a 12 year-old, "FAIL", really? It's not even missing the "epic". *sigh
Ontario currently receives equalization payments. Ontario currently has a bigger yearly deficit. Ontario just had this auto industry saved by huged subsidies paid by the rest of Canada (which doesn't count as equalization, but is still nonetheless pretty much the same). Ontario currently has a higher unemployement rate than Québec. I've seen better examples of "dependence".
@Vineon You are a hypocrite (and anyone who doesn't agree with you would presumably be called a 12 year old... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... I'm not insulted, pal). You freely admit that the international community prefers the status quo YET you claim Ottawa is responsible for Montreal's decline? Ummm... if the international community prefers the status quo, why is OTTAWA (and NOT the private sector/international community) responsible for Montreal's decline? YOU MAKE NO SENSE.
You cannot read french but on the odd chance you can (or can use a translator), about the Québec debt, my point is better elaborated by economist Louis Gill in an article for Le Devoir. Simply google "Dette du Québec: changements comptables et mythes tenaces".
@Vineon Le Devoir is separatist propaganda -- everyone knows that! Nonetheless, the fact that Louis Gill even needs to address "myths" solidifies my point (there is ALWAYS a bit of truth in everything). International investors, for right or wrong, buy into myths, they buy into hubris, speculation, etc. Do you follow the stock market? There is absolutely NO rationale for how it behaves at times. I read EVERYTHING I can (even opposing viewpoints -- unlike you, obviously).
@Vineon Am I crass? Absolutely. Do I speak English? Well, I'm a dual British/Canadian citizen and my mother is from LONDON, ENGLAND, so I certainly hope so (oh, do you want me to send you a photocopy of my passport? You probably don't believe me, hahahahahaha). Question for you pal, if -- by your own admission -- the international community is comfortable with the status quo, why do you foolishly advocate Quebec independence?
I asked if you speak REAL english following your ridiculous assumption that I don't speak REAL french because I live in Québec. Apparently, it is quite clear you weren't smart enough to grasp the comparison.
Besides, I am STILL waiting for a proof of that academic project you did that involved Cree and Mohawks leaders. Where is it, I've been asking for a while now. Any names to give, at the very least?
May I ask if the english you speak is "real" english? I assume you do not speak the variety spoken in England? Same thing with Québec and France. Same thing with Portugese shared between Portugal and Brazil... or spanish between Spain and South America.
It is fucking complete fallacy to claim a Québécois and a French person cannot understand each other. It is always amusing to hear this sort of argument coming from unilingual english people, such as yourself.
"Your grandiose assumptions of Quebec's importance to Toronto are inflated and false."
Fact : Toronto is extremely dependent on the St-Lawrence waterway. I'm fairly sure every single person living there aknowledges that. Here's the kick, that river goes mainly through Québec. That, along with many other things spell one scenario : free trade. You know, the same free trade that's going on now.
"Basically what you're saying is Quebec (a province with a shrinking population of 7+ million) has done more for Canada than vice versa. LAUGHABLE. Keep on dreaming."
@Vineon Wow... thanks for the good laugh this morning. Do you not see how you twist the facts? Konrad Sioui is a tool, he only speaks Quebec-joual (the garbage you speak is NOT French, lol), he's not native, the Huron are separatists, etc. I'm not even gracing you with a debate or a response to that garbage. I tell you something (detrimental to your cause), you discount it as being false or by twisting facts. Your "brain" is clogged.
I said there are Huron-Wendat sovereignists not that they all were. The reason is, many of them, especially those not living on the island, live in Quebec City and are at least about as much french as they are Huron-Wendat. There are Québec sovereignists amongst most tribes by the way, including a few elected MPs and Members of the National Assembly.
And yeah, Konrad Sioui only speaks french and 2 or 3 words of english.
And it's certainly fact that the Huron-Wendat are likely the most metised of the 11 recognized First Nations in Québec (and one of the smallest). Most of their ancestral behaviours are sadly a think of the past, including their ancestral language, which none of them speak to my knowledge.
@Vineon People that know anything about economics certainly don't need to consult Wikipedia. You IMPLIED that Toronto needs Quebec more than vice versa, you stubbornly cling to your convoluted idea that "assets" actually mean anything in the eyes and minds of international investors (Hydro-Quebec would NOT save Quebec in the likely event of a default, I really laughed over that one), "per capita" GDP (the US' is supremely higher than Quebec's anyway) and assets "per capita" mean NOTHING.
"You IMPLIED that Toronto needs Quebec more than vice versa"
I've said Toronto is heavily dependent on the St-Lawrence waterway. This much is true. I have no idea what Québec is dependent on Toronto for, care to share??
What assets like HQ allow, is a better credit rate and therefore better interest rates because assets are a certain guarantee of payment. In short, in the event of a disaster, they can be sold and loaners can get their money. They lower the risk. Of course this stuff is taken into consideration, what moron would think otherwise? Oh yeah, you.
Per capita is the only proper way to make comparisons between states with very varying size, like you did between Québec and the United States. Most of the USA's states did not nationalize on the level that Québec did, not even close.
@Vineon I shouldn't say GDP per capita means nothing, but international investors don't look at it when determining the creditworthiness of a state (the United Kingdom, Ireland, and United States are excellent examples of this). But according to you, Quebec is "special" and somehow different from any other region in the world (meaning Quebec would avoid default or significant economic problems because of its "assets").
"(meaning Quebec would avoid default or significant economic problems because of its "assets")."
Never fucking said that.
I brought up its assets to relativize Québec's debt's weight. I'm saying that NET DEBT comparisons (which take assets into consideration), are a better tool of comparisons between countries than GROSS DEBT comparisons. They do use net debt comparisons in Europe btw. In North America, for some dumb reason, we prefer more flawed comparisons.
@Vineon And you're right about the tax base in Quebec, what's left of it (high income Montreal Anglos -- people you undoubtedly resent) DOES pay it's fair share of taxes (Quebec has some of the highest migration rates in Canada -- its salaries are sometimes a fraction of what is on offer in English Canada) but that hasn't stopped Quebec from realizing some of the lowest productivity in Canada yet some of the highest debt (serious economic challenges).
I don't resent anglophones at all. I know its always been very difficult for dumbasses like you to understand that Québec sovereignism can spawn from anything other than hatred but in most cases it does. Considering you likely still live in your mom's basement, I don't expect you to understand the natural desires for a nation to get more autonomy.
If I were an anglophobe, I very much likely wouldn't have learned the language and wouldn't participate in discussions in that language
@Vineon Is everything a big conspiracy to you? HAHAHAHA I'm actually pissing myself right now. Regardless of Sioui's competence in speaking English, he DID welcome Kate and William to Quebec by saying "YOU ARE THE ESSENCE OF CANADA." He presented William with a replica of a 1760 agreement between England and the Huron. Who cares if he speaks German, fact is, this kind of gesture is INCOMPATIBLE with the ideology of Quebec separatism.
I never said anything about a conspiracy, what in hell are you talking about.
What I've said, is that the Huron-Wendat guy that met Princess Kate... is really much just a french Québécois with a hat made of chicken feathers.
There were many sovereignists that were entirely fine with the visit of Kate and William. This was the position of the Parti Québécois btw. Had they been in power, they likely would have hosted the royals all the same.
@Vineon if net debt was all that mattered, why is Ireland (whose net debt is LOWER than the UKs) in much more trouble than the UK? Net debt isn't everything pal, and to assume it is speaks to your incredible ignorance when it comes to comprehending economics.
His conclusion, which was pretty much mine, simply states that while Québec's debt is problematic, it is clearly below the OECD countries average. He calculates it to be at about 32% of Québec's GDP while the average is 51%. Yes this includes the part of the Canadian debt that would belong to Québec if it were a country.
@Vineon Louis Gill is but one of MANY individuals with some knowledge of economics. For every "Louis Gill" arguing otherwise, I can find a Michael Campbell, Jack Mintz, or even Maxime Bernier who argue that separation of the province of Quebec from Canada would be economic suicide. Transfers per capita don't mean much when some of the recipients (such as P.E.I) have 150,000 people. As a WHOLE, Quebec's 7.5 million inhabitants gobble up a SUBSTANTIAL portion of Canadian equalization payments.
Je doute que la plupart des économistes fortement contre l'indépendance du Québec croient qu'il s'agirait d'un "suicide". Il y a nuances à apporter entre croire que le Québec est économiquement plus fort dans le Canada et croire que celui-ci ne peut suivre sans lui. Cette dernière thèse, j'aimerais bien savoir qui la supporte. Probablement même pas Maxime Bernier.
@Vineon And nice (but not really) avoidance of my question. If net debt were truly all that mattered, why is Ireland (with a lower net debt) in substantially more trouble than the UK--whose net debt is higher? These are questions for which you have no answers (because you are blind to ALL sides of the argument). Of course separatists would say and do anything to assure themselves (nobody else really believes in your crap) that their arguments are air tight, when in reality they are anything but.
Je n'ai pas trouvé de données spécifiques à la dette brute et dette nette de l'Irlande. Peut-être pourriez-vous les fournir? Comme vous n'aviez toujours pas compris la différence entre les deux termes il n'y a pas si longtemps, je mets en doute vos capacités à en faire un portrait représentatif.
@Vineon Thank you for all the selective answers, the selective comprehension, the twisting, the hypocrisy, the endless contradictions, et cetera, but I feel -- especially in light of your most recent and entirely laughable game (responding in insignificant "Quebec-joual") -- the time has come to put my knowledge to better use. I don't debate with children (especially ones who are too ignorant, too blind, and too extreme for their own good). I only pray that you don't procreate.
@Vineon If you truly believe the French give two shits about your province, you're an even bigger fool than I initially thought. The French are concerned about their economy, their jobs, the delicate situation of the E.U, etc. While you're absolutely right that some may be sympathetic to your cause, rest assured there are countless more who support a united Canada (including the current French president).
Je suis certain que les Français ne sont pas grandement mobilisés par la situation politique du Québec. Il demeure que lorsqu'on leur demande, ils sont sympathiques au mouvement souverainiste en majorité. Vous insinuez que la majorité appuie le Canada uni alors que le contraire est vrai.
Même si Sarkozy (présentement bien détesté par la plupart des Français) s'y oppose.
@Vineon Until you actually open your mind and expand your thought processes (beyond the myopic glare of the Quebec sovereignty movement -- a passé concept at best), I consider myself as having won this one sided "debate" -- I'm extremely confident that any other reader of this would agree.
Vous dites : " I consider myself as having won this one sided "debate""
Bien entendu.
Vos connaissances économiques n'incluent même pas les plus élémentaires notions, par exemple ce qu'est la péréquation et vous connaissances sociologiques sur le Québec semblent encore plus limités.
@Vineon Your arguments are always the same -- and will always be the same (this is symbolic of the myopic and simplistic nature of the Quebec sovereignty movement -- nothing ever changes). This makes for a very one sided, simple (easy), and boring debate. Grow up and as I say -- expand your mind! Thank God that out of the 39% of Quebeckers who do support sovereignty, the extreme ones (such as yourself) only make up a fraction of that number.
Vous dites : "Your arguments are always the same"
Évidemment. C'est si ceux-ci changeaient au gré des vents que vous devriez vous poser des questions.
D'ailleurs, j'ai au moins la prétention d'en avoir 'des arguments'. Les vôtres se refusent à toutes élaboration, tout approfondissement, toute analyse. En réalité, vous n'en avez pas... ou vous semblez incapable de les défendre.
@Vineon My supposed lack of comprehension with regard to economics (when in reality, you know absolutely NOTHING about ANYTHING) is a rich opinion considering you won't even answer my question about net debt... IF THE IRELAND'S NET DEBT IS LOWER THAN THE UK'S, WHY IS IRELAND (and NOT the UK) IN MUCH MORE ECONOMIC TROUBLE? I'll tell you why, because net debt is NOT everything in the eyes of international investors. To try and argue otherwise is simply and utterly STUPID!
Montrez-moi donc ses chiffres concernant la dette Irlandaise. On en discutera ensuite. Le problème, c'est que vous avez démontré dans vos précédents commentaires être incapable de faire la nuance entre la dette nette et la dette brute d'un état. Voyons vos sources, d'abord, afin d'être certain que vous ne confondez pas les termes, encore une fois.
@Vineon Yes, I've seen what you feel are "expert" opinions on that matter. They argue that UN law clearly states that lands which have ALWAYS been included in territories cannot be taken away. Yet what they fail to acknowledge is that over half of Quebec's current territory was NEVER included in Quebec's original boundaries -- think 1898 and 1912 additions.
"Yet what they fail to acknowledge is that over half of Quebec's current territory was NEVER included in Quebec's original boundaries -- think 1898 and 1912 additions."
It was absolutely aknowledged in the document. Experts is without quotation marks, I have their names and you can look them up if you want : they all have a wikipedia entry. Not any Joe Bloes.
Certainly worth hearing out more than nobodies like yourself are, in any case.
@Vineon Go read a book on economics... you desperately need to. And yes, the net outflow of capital from Quebec started in the 1970s with the election of the PQ. Oh, but according to you, Ottawa is responsible for private sector and capital outflows from the province of Quebec. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... I'm sorry dude, but I've showed a few people your thoughts and we all agree --- Quebec must have some mighty fine drugs because you're delusional.
@Vineon Again, the MAJORITY of Quebeckers SUPPORT remaining in Canada. Do you realize this? 50 years from now, Alberta may separate, so hypothetical future scenarios aren't really all that important (China may invade the States, etc). As of today however, support for Quebec independence remains BELOW the key 50% level.
Aujourd'hui, l'appui à la souveraineté est effectivement sous la barre des 50%. Il s'agit d'un appui cependant qui change selon les années, selon la conjoncture. Celui-ci était monté à 70% suite à l'échec de l'accord du Lac Meech.
@Vineon Move beyond your stale mentality... get off the whole "net" vs "gross" twisting (i.e YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE, BLA BLA BLA). I understand the difference perfectly well... YOU don't understand that all I said before was that international investors DO NOT care SOLELY about "net debt." If that were the case, the UK would be in much more economic trouble than Ireland (here's a big hint: see PIGS - Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain).
Puis-je en voir les chiffres? Évidemment, une comparaison par habitant s'imposera immédiatement. Pas certain que vous avez pensé faire ces simples calculs, pourtant nécessaire à la compréhension.
@Vineon PS. Although Sarkozy isn't particularly popular in France right now, his views on Canadian unity have absolutely NOTHING to do with his low approval ratings. And besides, a week is an eternity in politics (anything can change). Who would have predicted the shattering of the Bloc Quebecois in the most recent federal election and the subsequent mutiny in the PQ which has driven that party's level of support to within striking distance of the Charest Liberals? ;-) THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK.
@Vineon I want Quebec gone, don't get me wrong (WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE). Just realize, Quebec would be shattered economically and politically if it ever did separate and the already VERY HIGH "NET" outflows of capital and people from Quebec would undoubtedly accelerate. Oh wait, sorry, according to you, Ottawa is at fault for ruining Quebec's economic base (and not the private sector which you freely admit -- PREFERS THE STATUS QUO). You have absolute shit for brains.
@Vineon In regards to Legault and his "gang" I'm fully aware that his hypothetical party is currently nonexistent. My point was, a plurality of Quebeckers WOULD vote for such a party IF such a party existed (and that, in and of itself, is a dangerous blow to your cause). I think you should understand, I'm all for Quebec separating. It would make Canada wealthier and more productive for starters. Nonetheless, I'm just pointing out the obvious -- it would ruin Quebec financially and politically.
@Vineon I get that you leftard victims don't really value the laws of economics, but seriously, come on... you're not even a soft nationalist but a reckless ideologue (and MOST Quebeckers, even most nationalists, don't take such hard-core views). I'm not saying the entirety of the Quebec sovereignty movement is "reckless" and "hard core" ... I am saying that about you though.
You have no knowledge of economics whatsoever. This was made clear in both our conversations about the debt and credit rating agencies. I am certainly not a leftie. You likely couldn't argue for a second about equalization nor transfer payments either, I have a feeling your understanding of both is extremely basic.
@Vineon You have absolutely NO intuition and cannot argue against FACTS. For anyone who dismisses Montreal's demise relative to Toronto's rise as "Ottawa politics" is truly convoluted and effed in the head. I am actually smiling as I write this. You consider yourself some kind of warrior but in reality, you're nothing more than a misinformed victim who simply cannot accept that his little views are in the minority.
You have no facts. You talk about equalization but you cannot make the difference between it and transfer payments as a whole. You talk of debt but you refuse to aknowledge the difference between a gross and a net debt. You talk about credit agency ratings saying they do not affect interest rates what that is what they fucking exist for. I honestly cannot fathom just how much of an ignorant you are and every single one of your so-called "facts" are easily debunked.
@Vineon finally, I know many proper European Francophones who think the joual trash you speak is an insult to their language. I didn't say mutual understanding was impossible (who's putting words in whose mouth now bitch? LOL), I said the trash you speak can HARDLY be considered French (one of the more refined languages of the world). Quebec joual garbage: watch?v=5lB-AX8_lSA
I know plenty of Americans who believe British english is ridiculous and actually fairly hard to decipher at times. I'm fairly sure the opposite is just as true. The french Québécois make fun of the Parisian french accent all the time and it happens to be reciprocal.
@Vineon and when you look at the total picture, Quebec truly would be an economic disaster without Canada. That's why Pequistes and Liberals have joined forces to build a THIRD party (that according to polls, would win a plurality of votes) in Quebec that would focus on the province's economy versus the old separatist/federalist debate. It seems EVERYONE but YOU realizes that Quebec has MAJOR economic challenges! A region with economic challenges is NOT worthy of independence.
You said : "That's why Pequistes and Liberals have joined forces to build a THIRD party"
If you can't even follow Québec news properly, don't even bother. I'm sure you speak of François Legault and his little gang (which only so far seem to include one person : Charles Sirois). They aren't a political party, if at least yet. They actually never made it clear if they wanted to be.
@Vineon especially when that region is dependent on 20+ million taxpayers keeping it afloat. YOU ARE A LAUGHABLE AND IGNORANT DISGRACE (and you're fucking dumb too).
This video you've shown, oh cretin, is no example. It showcases the french Québécois accent, not "joual". Joual would be extreme slangish quebecois french, one you wouldn't ever hear on tv shows like this one but only on a few sitcoms. You don't even have a fucking clue what joual is. Moreover, that video is packed full of France people commenting..... and they are all praising the accent.
@Vineon I don't speak just one language, but I admit -- I DO NOT speak Quebec's dialect. Everything about it repulses me (and most of my truly French friends). Remember, France abandoned Quebec for Louisiana and it's Caribbean colonies. Nicolas Sarkozy has smartly snubbed your pathetic movement. What makes you think true Francophones give two shits about leftard "conspiracy" degenerates like you? HAHAHAHAHAHA! (and yes, anyone who assumes "Ottawa" played a part in Montreal's demise is a fool)
@Vineon basically EVERYONE who is NOT a separatist supports my positions. Quebec's TOTAL debt is unsustainable without the Canadian taxpayer (27 million taxpayers funding 7.5 million... hmmmm... I hope you can see who is the bigger payer). Quebec's taxes are among the highest in North America and yet its workforce is among the least productive (these are HUGE economic challenges for Quebec, but they're masked as long as Quebec remains apart of Canada).
You said : "basically EVERYONE who is NOT a separatist supports my positions. "
First off, this is akin to a pro-life person saying "everyone that isn't pro abortion supports my positions". Thankfully in Québec and quite a few economists, that put forward a favorable argument for sovereignty. This is perfectly normal, because half the population supports it. In Canada, it is no wonder that Québec sovereignty isn't ever properly argued, not a single soul would support it.
Vous êtes un cancre en matière de langue française, ne venez quand même dire que vous ne croyez pas que 'stationnement' signifie 'parking'. Qu'en savez-vous? Vous ne parlez même pas le français. Maintenant, prenez un dictionnaire français en ligne et vous y trouverez tout de suite le terme.
@Vineon and true to my suspicions (regarding your obvious lack of self-esteem and incredible insecurity), I see my jokingly used "joual" continues to irritate you. I FUCKING LOVE IT! :-D The fact that you couldn't see this for what it was (a complete mockery of you), really shows how pathetic and dumb you are. Go read a book (and one NOT written by a separatist or someone foolish enough to be sympathetic to one). Open your mind, lol.
@Vineon Finally, any region that is dependent on another (no matter how small) is simply NOT worthy of separating. Let's say Quebec were the second LOWEST recipient of transfer payments, fact remains, Quebec depends on Canada (no matter how small and insignificant). If Quebec were an Île-de-France or a République et Canton de Genève, perhaps you could make an economic argument for separation.
Vineon is not writing in joual but in perfect French. As for the idea that "nations" are getting together... Yes and the entire E.U. project is a catastrophic failure that has robbed nations of the tools necessary to defend themselves against an economic and immigration disaster.
Yes take a few years willham95, and we will discuss again the virtues of nations "coming together", when France, Holland, UK and Russia have become Muslim states. We will do it in Arabic too, God willing!
jceepf 3 months ago
Polls that are that close really should be recounted.
kensei85 4 months ago
Quebecers should be happy that they lost the vote because if they left Canada, they'd have been fucked
Tons of people would've left and what would Quebec do without all the Ottawa payments to them? Quebec definitely needs Canada more than Canada needs Quebec, although I'm happy they stayed.
JDubs878 5 months ago
@JDubs878
"without all the Ottawa payments"
Highly exagerated are those payments. If Québec receives a certain amount more than it contributes to, it is little money. When considered spendings that Canada makes that Québec wouldn't, the gap is quite easily breached. Wars overseas come to mind, the highly costly bill to insure northern sovereignty comes to mind, bilingualism coast to coast comes to mind.
Vineon 4 months ago
The polls were obviously rigged.
bobslay12 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Did you know the referendums are illegal? The Constitution prohibits both annexation and secession, it was designed that way in 1865 by the Founding Fathers. The legislative powers were divided between the Federal Parliament and the Provincial Legislatures. The provinces received an "enumerated" list of powers under s. 92. "Enumerated" means they can't do anything that isn't on the list. There is DELIBERATELY no power to secede. There thus can be NO REFERENDUM on the subject of secession.
crazyforcanada 6 months ago
And Vineon, read ALL my answers before foolishly responding. Although you make me laugh at some point in this boring debate (I get bored when all I do is win), I'd like to have an adult conversation.
willham95 6 months ago
And Vineon, don't be offended. Your language is what it is. English in North America is much more similar to the English of England than is the Quebec-joual to the standard French of France and Switzerland. Nonetheless, I personally know MANY people in London who find North American English distasteful and unrefined. I laugh.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
A limited unilingual fool such as yourself should avoid the topic of languages. Especially if you want to talk about mine, which you don't speak and which you have no fucking understanding of.
That you show me a video of a woman that speaks perfect pitched french, but with an Québec accent, and call it "joual" is beyond ridiculous. It's as if I were a British watching an American newscast and called it "harlem ghetto slang".
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon you're right... I certainly don't speak your "language" hahahahahahaha! Quebec-joual (I don't think people were praising the accent as much as they were mocking it. Most of those comments could be interpreted as very condescending) ;-) I know more about economics than you, I think anyone reading this would come to that conclusion. "Gdp per capita" "net debt" etc... keep fooling yourself. LOL.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
You said : " (I don't think people were praising the accent as much as they were mocking it. "
Of course you don't : you can't even read them. The difference is I can and most of them were praising them, including the brazilian fellow that actually put online the goddamn video.
Moreoever, it isn't joual. If you want joual, listen to a sitcom like La Petite Vie.
You don't know the very basics of economics.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon FYI, I know damn well what joual is ;-) I'm using the term to mock what you feel is French. I get a kick out of seeing how DESPERATELY you try (and fail) to make any kind of dent in my sound arguments. I like mocking you and seeing you react. Yeah yeah yeah, I know I'm sick, but it is what it is. It's kind of like when insecure Canadians get their knickers in a knot over the American term "Canadia." Every American knows it's Canada, but they use "Canadia" to get a rise out of people.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Vous dites : " FYI, I know damn well what joual is"
Haha. Clairement pas. Vous avez vous-même admis plusieurs fois ne pas comprendre le français. Comment pouvez-vous espérer maintenant en comprendre les nuances? L'extrait que vous m'avez montré, supposément contenant du 'joual', n'en était pas.
Vous dites : " I see my jokingly used "joual"
Vous changez votre fusil d'épaule, comme un pleutre, vous rendant compte que votre rhétorique sur le français québécois puait l'ignorance.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon You have no choice but to learn English and speak it. You'd sink pretty damn fast if you refused to learn the most important language in the history of the world. The fact that you have resorted to writing in Quebec-joual is an admission of defeat (you obviously have nothing relevant to say). I asked for an adult conversation and as per your type's usual bad form, you unsurprisingly have resorted to playing games. Clearly, I have gotten to you (pat on the back for me).
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Bon, une autre litanie de commentaires insipides.
Le Québec est l'état le plus bilingue d'Amérique du Nord mais l'apprentissage de l'anglais m'y est certainement pas automatique. La majorité n'est pas bilingue. Il n'est pas étonnant que vous ne compreniez pas les efforts nécessaires à l'apprentissage d'une langue seconde, étant unilingue vous-même.
Mon français écrit n'est certainement pas du 'joual', vous n'avez d'ailleurs toujours aucune notion de ce que ce terme signifie.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon And Vineon, even if Quebec were the LOWEST recipient of transfer payments, fact is -- IT RECEIVES THEM (no matter how small). Any region receiving money from another is dependent upon the donating region (again, no matter how small the transfers actually are). This is a FACT. The other provinces receiving transfer payments are irrelevant to this discussion because they are not threatening separation. Quebec, while dependent on ANY transfers, is simply NOT worthy of independence. Fact.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Vous dites : "even if Quebec were the LOWEST recipient of transfer payments, fact is -- IT RECEIVES THEM (no matter how small)"
Votre ignorance crasse transparait encore une fois. Toutes les provinces reçoivent un certain montant en transferts fédéraux aux provinces d'Ottawa. Si c'est de la péréquation dont vous voulez parler, faites-y allusion correctement.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Fool, other provinces have never seriously threatened separation. The fact that ALL provinces may or may not have received federal transfers is irrelevant because that's the price ALL countries pay for remaining united (there are ALWAYS wealthier regions helping out less wealthy regions). The equation changes, however, when you have a whining province like Quebec (Maxime Bernier even alluded to this) receiving payments YET threatening separation. NOT WORTHY OF INDEPENDENCE! PERIOD.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Vous dites : "Fool, other provinces have never seriously threatened separation. "
Je n'ai jamais dit le contraire. Essayez de comprendre avant de répondre.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon In fact, two other "experts" (Barry Cooper and David Bercuson, a born and bred Quebecker himself... HA HA!) say Quebec doesn't even really have any claim to the entire south shore of the St. Lawrence. What do you say to that? Are they idiots and ignoramuses, too? You're naive if you assume Quebec will peacefully drift off into nationhood because of everything YOU FEEL (there is NO FACT to what you say) is true. You REALLY need to open your mind, dude.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
"In fact, two other "experts" (Barry Cooper and David Bercuson, a born and bred Quebecker himself... HA HA!) say Quebec doesn't even really have any claim to the entire south shore of the St. Lawrence."
C'est une farce j'espère. Premièrement, mes experts sont internationaux et maîtres en droit international, vos experts sont Canadiens Anglais, de toute évidence extrêmement biaisés.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon you saying that you never said otherwise to my statement that "other provinces have never threatened separation" is nothing more than twisting of what you know I mean... Quebec, while receiving federal transfer payments, IS NOT WORTHY OF INDEPENDENCE. Period. Forget Quebec's "dependence" on equalization payments (are you actually saying that Quebec could continue to fund its obligations WITHOUT federal transfers from Ottawa? SHIT FOR BRAINS)...
willham95 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@willham95
" Quebec, while receiving federal transfer payments, IS NOT WORTHY OF INDEPENDENCE."
Vous n'avez toujours pas compris la différence entre les transferts fédéraux (transfer payments) et la péréquation (equalization). Des transferts fédéraux, toutes les provinces en reçoivent, de la plus riche à la moins riche.
Vineon 5 months ago
@Vineon Anyway, I'm on the winning team (that's all that really matters). Everything I've presented is irrelevant (though much less so than the garbage you spew from your ignorant and blind body) because NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE IN QUEBEC SUPPORT INDEPENDENCE. HEAR THAT? UNDERSTAND THAT? YOU SIMPLY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SUPPORTERS! PERIOD. And that really is the crux of all this. That alone invalidates ALL of your hypothetical "arguments" (horseshit).
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Quelle logique douteuse.
C'est vrai qu'une majorité rejette présentement l'indépendance mais ça n'en invalide pas les arguments. Autrement, il faudrait y comprendre que les arguments contre l'esclavagisme et le vote pour les femmes étaient invalides lorsque ceux-ci ne parvenaient pas à rejoindre la majorité.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon ...while Quebec receives ANY money from Ottawa (and thus Canada), the threat of separation can HARDLY be taken seriously. If Quebec truly sent more money to Ottawa than it receives back, Quebec would be a "have" province (in the same league as Alberta and Saskatchewan). QUEBEC IS A HAVE NOT PROVINCE (meaning it receives MORE money than it sends)! Period. You cannot twist that. Also, still waiting to hear why Ireland is in more trouble than the UK despite having lower "net debt."
willham95 6 months ago
Comment removed
Vineon 5 months ago
@willham95
" Also, still waiting to hear why Ireland is in more trouble than the UK despite having lower "net debt.""
J'attends la source. Vous avez déjà démontré ne pas savoir la différence entre la dette brute et la dette nette d'un état. Je n'ai pas trouvé vos chiffres alors montrez les moi.
Trop difficile de sourcer vos allégations?
Vineon 5 months ago
@Vineon do you have any idea what is going on in Ireland right now? Wow,"figures"? You're a blabbering idiot. Read the news. Still waiting for an equal debate. 1. Quebec is divisible. 2. Quebec is a HAVE-NOT province (the only have provinces in Canada right now are, BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland). This means Quebec IS dependent on federal transfers (to the tune of 7.5+ BILLION a year). 3. It's very difficult to debate someone who insists on speaking a dialect, Quebec joual ;-)
willham95 5 months ago
@willham95
Le français écrit Québécois est exactement le même que celui utilisé en France. Il n'existe pas de différences grammaticales comme ceux qu'on peut observer entre l'espagnol parlé en Espagne et celui parlé en Amérique du Sud. Même l'anglais utilisé en Angleterre versus celui utilisé aux États-Unis démontre davantage de différences, à l'écrit, que le Français Québécois versus celui de la France.
Si le français parlé Québécois est dialecte, l'est autant votre anglais nord-américain.
Vineon 4 months ago
@willham95
Les paiements de péréquations ne représentent pas la différence entre ce que le Québec reçoit et ce qu'il envoie à Ottawa. Ce 7.5 millions est donc à relativiser. Si le Québec reçoit davantage en péréquation, il reçoit moins dans divers autres transferts fédéraux, notamment en transferts aux entreprises et en recherche et développement.
Vineon 4 months ago
@Vineon Ireland's net debt is LOWER than the UKs, yet it's economy is substantially worse off. Explain this. 99.9% of people don't need a "source" to understand this. Net debt is NOT everything in the eyes of international investors. Just last week, Moodys mentioned the "low threat" of Quebec separation when renewing Canada's AAA credit rating (OBVIOUSLY Quebec separation would be VERY unfavourable to the economy).
willham95 5 months ago
@willham95
" Ireland's net debt is LOWER than the UKs"
Puis-je en voir les chiffres? Évidemment, une comparaison par habitant s'imposera immédiatement. Pas certain que vous avez pensé faire ces simples calculs, pourtant nécessaire à la compréhension.
Vineon 4 months ago
@Vineon And yes... Ireland's net debt is lower than the UK's (DESTROYS your theory that all international investors look at is net debt, considering Ireland is in much more economic danger than the United Kingdom), and YES, nations and regions ARE coming together (hence the EXTREME CONCERN for PRESERVING the Eurozone and E.U in general, the Canada-US security perimeter, etc -- YOU HAVE SHIT FOR BRAINS).
willham95 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@willham95
"And yes... Ireland's net debt is lower than the UK's "
Par habitant? Faut-il vous expliquer qu'il serait plutôt normal qu'un état ayant 10 fois la taille de l'autre ait une dette plus importante en nombre absolu sans que son poids sur ses habitant y soit relativement plus imposant?
Le reste de votre commentaire n'est qu'un 'speak white' mettant bien en lumière votre crasseux racisme.
Vineon 3 months ago
@Vineon Do you think Ottawa had something to do with Moodys' mentioning of Quebec? Maybe Ottawa instructed the ratings agency to "scare" Quebeckers. LOL (that's how stupid your mentality is). You need to understand that your quest for independence would accomplish nothing of tangible economic value for Quebec (it would benefit Canada in the long run, however, so I'm all for it). At a time when nations and regions are coming together, you seem to want the opposite (again, SHIT FOR BRAINS).
willham95 5 months ago
@willham95
"At a time when nations and regions are coming together"
Pourtant, ce n'est pas la réalité. Depuis la deuxième guerre mondiale, il y a pratiquement maintenant près de 4 fois plus d'états indépendants qu'il y en avait à l'époque.
Certainement, des accords économiques existent en plus grand nombre mais aucun des pays constituants ne remettra sa pleine souveraineté en doute.
Accepteriez-vous, dans cette grande dynamique de regroupement, que le Canada devienne un état américain?
Vineon 4 months ago
@Vineon I don't speak Quebec joual trash. When you're ready to debate me in English -- the language of international business and commerce, aviation, and widely accepted as the most important language IN THE WORLD -- I'll talk to you. I guess even a month off for you didn't do much to improve your cognitive functioning. Maybe take a few years off before getting back to me again, loser. I didn't read your month-long "rebuke." As soon as I saw "pourtant, ce n'est pas..." I thought "QUEBEC JOUAL."
willham95 4 months ago
@willham95
Vous dites : "Quebec, while dependent on ANY transfers, is simply NOT worthy of independence. Fact."
Premièrement, il n'est pas dépendant des transferts.
Deuxièmement, vous confondez encore une fois les transferts fédéraux et le seul transfert de la péréquation.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon And contrary to your assertions, Quebec IS dependent on federal transfers. If it were not ... IT WOULDN'T RECEIVE THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE! PERIOD! TRY TO UNDERSTAND THIS FRUSTRATINGLY SIMPLE CONCEPT!!! If a region takes even 1 dollar from another region, IT CLEARLY REQUIRES THAT 1 DOLLAR! TO ARGUE OTHERWISE IS LAUGHABLE. GROW UP!
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Vous dites : " And contrary to your assertions, Quebec IS dependent on federal transfers."
C'est faux. Le Québec reçoit environ 27% des transferts fédéraux pour 24% de la population. La manque à gagner, environ deux milliards, est aisément comblé par certaines dépenses Canadienne dont le Québec n'a pas besoin.
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
Le Québec, par exemple, n'aurait probablement pas commandé pour 30 milliards de nouveaux avions de chasse. Le Québec devra pourtant payer environ 6 milliards à lui seul pour ceux-ci.
Le Québec n'aurait pas à payer le milliard qu'il paie annuellement pour le maintien de la souveraineté du nord Canadien. Il n'y aurait plus d'argent gaspillé dans le bilinguisme 'coast to coast' et le dédoublement des technocracies.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon I would ABSOLUTELY respect a 50% + 1 vote on secession from Canada (I feel Quebeckers have every right to determine their future). But you too must accept a 50% + 1 vote from ANYONE (natives, Montreal, etc) who chooses to secede from Quebec and either remain apart of or rejoin Canada. And yes, Quebec IS divisible contrary to separatist and soft-nationalist--but not separatist (Jean Charest)--claims (MORE hypocrisy from Quebeckers).
willham95 6 months ago
@Vineon Remember, France abandoned New France (Quebec) in favour of its Guadeloupe and Martinique colonies. Apparently sugar cane was more important than you (umm... err... *cough cough* HAHAHAHAHAHA). You're living in a dream world if you think the sophisticated and admirable French give two fucks about your irrelevant and declining province. Give it up, bud. It's time to focus on other things like your bloated bureaucracy and sluggish economy (and many separatists are starting to get this).
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
La France n'est pas davantage mon pays que ne l'est le Canada.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon It took you a week to come up with more Quebec joual garbage? Hahahaha... I see you obviously needed the break. Bottom line is, Quebec is divisible regardless of what authors claim (you really are a fool to claim that support for the concept of Quebec divisibility falls along linguistic lines ... SHIT FOR BRAINS). The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that, like Canada, Quebec is divisible. And that's really all that matters.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Ce n'est pas du joual et vous n'en comprenez toujours pas d'ailleurs la signification.
Je cite des experts en droit internationaux et vous rejetez leurs conclusions. Bien à vous mais n'insinuez quand même pas être davantage crédible qu'eux. Pour utiliser un terme que vous comprendrez aussitôt : vous ête un nobody.
Vineon 5 months ago
@willham95
Troisièmement, l'immense majorité des pays occidentaux déjà indépendants recevrait de la péréquation dans une fédération Canadienne, n'ayant pas la force vive économique des provinces Canadiennes productrices de pétrole. Qui serait assez con pour insinuer qu'elles ne sont pas, en conséquence, "dignes" de l'indépendance? Vous, bien entendu.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon and again, switching to QUEBEC JOUAL HORSESHIT is nothing more than another of your petty games. I'm waiting for an adult conversation, yet you prefer to write in your insignificant and entirely laughable dialect -- a dialect you have the nerve to insultingly call "French." This is symbolic of your jingoistic retreat into your dark and lonely trench (aka. you've got NOTHING else to say, so you figured you'd "RESORT" to Quebec joual). HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Urgh... SHIT for brains.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Misère..
Mon français écrit, très international, n'a rien du 'joual'. Vous ne savez d'ailleurs même pas ce qu'est le joual de toute façon. Non, le joual n'est pas le simple 'accent Québécois'. D'ailleurs, à l'écrit, vous n'y noterez évidement aucun accent. Le reste de votre commentaire frôle le racisme et ne mérite même pas que j'y fasse allusion.
Vous semblez bien fier d'être limité à l'unilinguisme.
:)
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon BTW, I don't just speak one language. I will never lower myself to the garbage you feel is French though, correct. Still waiting for my adult conversation btw.
willham95 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@willham95
Vous dites : "BTW, I don't just speak one language. I will never lower myself to the garbage you feel is French though, correct. Still waiting for my adult conversation btw."
Bien amusant.
On rabaisse ma langue et prétend ensuite vouloir converser entre adultes. Le problème, c'est qu'il n'y en a qu'un ici. Une conversation entre adultes, je serai bien content d'en avoir une lorsque vous atteindrez ce stade.
=)
Vineon 5 months ago
@willham95
Vous n'êtes pas unilingue?
Par curiosité, quelle autre langue maîtrisez-vous?
Vineon 5 months ago
@willham95
Le Québec a des économies d'échelle importantes à faire en se débarrassant d'un gouvernement qui ne dépense pas selon ses intérêts. L'argent québécois injecté dans la guerre en Afghanistan, par exemple. Au final, l'argent que le Québec reçoit en retour d'Ottawa est aisément compensé par une meilleure utilisation de toutes nos taxes, selon les priorités propres au Québec.
Vineon 5 months ago
@uglybitch49 Your ignorance is truly shocking. According to Statistics Canada, the IMF, and even the Montreal Gazette, Quebec's debt to GDP ratio is the highest of all Canadian provinces (and the highest in North America). Quebec's input per capita (ie productivity) is also among the LOWEST in this country and indeed the continent (this makes Quebec's debt situation particularly worrisome). I bet if you finished grade 7, you'd know all this. Moral of the story, kids: STAY IN SCHOOL.
willham95 7 months ago
@willham95
You're talking about the gross debt, which makes no distinction between countries with a lot of assets and countries with very few of them. For a country with several assets, a higher debt is a given, as would a mortgage on an individual.
A much better comparison to make, is one of net debts (gross debt minus assets), which classifies Québec's debt as a bit lower than the OECD average.
No, they don't teach you this in grade 7. Moral of the story : go a bit beyond high school.
Vineon 7 months ago
Comment removed
willham95 7 months ago
@uglybitch49
Where in Canada do you live?
Vineon 7 months ago
@Vineon I just returned from a trip to la belle province and guess who I spoke too? Many native leaders (including Cree and Mohawk) who said "no matter what" -- they would ALWAYS vote to remain within Canada. They all spoke English, signs on all their reserves are in English only, and there were even a few Canadian flags fluttering off the balconies of some homes. This stuff must really hurt to hear, huh? Also, the PQ is in major damage control mode right now! LOL enjoy.
willham95 7 months ago
@willham95
First off, I don't believe you. Oh I kind of agree that the Mohawks are a long shot from voting for Québec independence, they've always been the most opposed to it. Moreover, they speak english (so do the Cree, although in their case, as a secondary language after their own).
I don't think the Mohawks can be brought to our side but I believe the Cree people can be, as can the Abenaki, the Inuits, the Innus, the Hurons and the others.
Vineon 7 months ago
@willham95
But what I don't believe is the funny event in which you chanced upon native Crees and Mohawks at the same time. It's probably worth noting they don't really live next to each other. And you didn't chance upon few of them outside their communities but you chanced upon 'leaders', apparently. What a load of bullshit.
I dont believe for one single second that the Cree were flaunting Canadian flags.
Must you resort to make-up stories????..
Vineon 7 months ago
@Vineon So your theory that Quebec can "outspend" Canada and thus win the favour of aboriginals is wrong. Also, judging by the number of Canadian flags flying on reserve lands and even on some private homes -- it would seem aboriginals actually like and feel "loyal" to CANADA ;-) Aboriginal inclusion in the 2010 Olympic games in Vancouver also increased feelings of aboriginal belonging and loyalty to Canada. Face it, independence is out of the question for the province of Quebec.
willham95 7 months ago
@willham95
It's not a theory, it's very simple maths. Québec spends more than its share on the Indian Affairs budget because it only owns 10% of the aboriginal Canadian population.
Unlike you, I can properly mount arguments without trying to spread the belief I went to the chieftain's hut and discussed politics with them. Laughable.
Vineon 7 months ago
@Vineon I don't care what you believe. You're a blind fool ignorant to reality and fearful of the truth. Period.
willham95 7 months ago
@Vineon I never said Mokawks and Crees live next to each other. I also don't care what Quebec's "budget" is... I have read reports that suggest that without the Canadian taxpayer, Quebec would be the next Greece or Portugal. Quebec has the lowest productivity yet highest debt in North America. This is an irrefutable fact. Most natives know this and thus will choose to remain a part of Canada. If you're so sure otherwise, why don't you talk to them yourself? Have you? NOPE!
willham95 7 months ago
@willham95
"Reports" you've heard that have Québec and Greece on the same foothold are beyond ridiculous. Find them and report back what is the core of their arguments so that we can have one of our own.
Québec does have a higher debt but with it a higher number of assets, why is this never taken into consideration? It isn't true for instance that a person with a $100,000 mortgage on a house is more indebted than someone with a $80,000 casino debt.
Vineon 7 months ago
@Vineon You should understand, international investors don't care about "assets." Greece has tons of "assets" and that certainly isn't helping it, is it? Investors look for political stability and economic stability. THAT'S IT! It is no coincidence that with the election of the PQ, Quebec (Montreal) went from being the economic powerhouse of Canada to a third rate backwater (behind Ontario and the West). Your twisted and convoluted (MINORITY) views are as old as your mentality itself. Grow up.
willham95 7 months ago
@willham95
You said : "You should understand, international investors don't care about "assets.""
Of course they do. Considering assets have value, they are always taken into consideration. Assets may count as a mean to pay the debt. I go back to my guy with a mortgage of 100,000 on a house. He's not into the same mess as that person with 80,000 of casino debt. He has a house, which has a value. The guy's casino debts do not have any value.
Vineon 7 months ago
@Vineon What you don't agree with, you simply discount as being "untrue" (my discussions with native elders as part of my co-op study, for example). And that is probably the most pathetic element of discussing any of this with you. Do you seriously believe I would come on here and "lie"? You do, and that speaks to lack of character and unwillingness to see ANYTHING apart from your convoluted and twisted views. Remember, Quebec voted TWICE to STAY in Canada and according to polls, theyd do it agn
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
A study? Did it perhaps spawn academic papers because I'd love to see them. Something must have spawned from this "study" right? You have a golden chance to prove these meetings between you and them took place, I'll be waiting for it.
But we both know you won't be interested in showing proofs. It is a bit difficult to prove that something that never happened did happen.
I don't believe for one second that you recently met Cree and Mohawk leaders and discussed Quebec issues
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon again, I couldn't care less what you "believe." EVERYONE knows that your type discount ANYTHING that can even be perceived as detrimental to your convoluted cause as "lies" and "untrue." I find you laughable. Forget about the Cree and Mohawks, why don't you use your little brain and read up on what Konrad Sioui (grand chief Quebec huron) said to William and Kate on their embarrassing visit to Quebec: "We are so happy to see you here. You represent the TRUE ESSENCE of ... C A N A D A"
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
I don't discount anything I perceive as detrimental but I certainly discount extremely unlikely and unverifiable events such as that conversation you had with Cree and Mohawks leaders. I don't even have a clue why you even thought for one second that it would sound believable.
You said it was part of an academic project. Why can't you show me anything about it???
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon I used the word intangible and questionable because "assets" mean different things to different people (certainly to international investors anyway). If you're so sure that the international community is fine with an independent Quebec, WHY DID MONTREAL LOSE ITS STATUS AS CANADA'S PARAMOUNT CENTRE FOR FINANCE AND BUSINESS? I can assure you, without Canada, Quebec IS the next Greece, Portugal, UK, or United States.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Assets simply are everything that has any value controlled by the government. Have you ever asked for a loan in your personal life? Your assets WILL be taken into consideration. The bank will want to know if it has any way to get its money back if difficulties arise.
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
"If you're so sure that the international community is fine with an independent Quebec"
You strike again. I'm sick to fucking hell to have you attribute me things I haven't said. My take has always been that the "international community", especially the business one, is much more comfortable with the status quo.
Vineon 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@willham95
You said : "WHY DID MONTREAL LOSE ITS STATUS AS CANADA'S PARAMOUNT CENTRE FOR FINANCE AND BUSINESS?"
Two things :
1) Ottawa's desire to move it to Toronto. They tampered with the St-Lawrence river to make facilitate access to Toronto. If they hadn't, Montréal would still yet be today Canada's business pole.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... Ottawa's desire to move finance to Toronto from Montreal? AHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Ok... you REALLY don't understand anything do you? Unlike Quebec, English Canadians prefer to leave matters of business to the private sector. English people are naturally entrepreneurial.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
"Ottawa's desire to move finance to Toronto from Montreal? "
Of course. Ever even since the merge of the lower and higher Canada was that made very clear. One of the main reason for the merge was to have Lower Canada's benefits pay for the the other's debt.
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
2) Québec's initiatives to make Montréal a completely french city and the threat of separation. Keep in mind that the business sector of Montréal, back then, was mostly english only. All that changed is that many simply changed city.
Vineon 6 months ago
Sioui also presented the Prince with a framed copy of a 1760 agreement between the Huron and ... THE BRITISH CROWN. Trust me pal, these people are NOT separatists and no matter how much you try to reassure yourself: they will NEVER be won over. Your grandiose assumptions of Quebec's importance to Toronto are inflated and false. Basically what you're saying is Quebec (a province with a shrinking population of 7+ million) has done more for Canada than vice versa. LAUGHABLE. Keep on dreaming.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Konrad Sioui is a tool and is about as much a native as I am. The guy is like 1/8 native and only speaks french. As do all the Huron-Wendat, I guess. They are certainly amongst the least native of the natives.
Also, many of them (unlike say Mohawks) are already Québec sovereignists.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon But I say separate (too bad the majority of Quebeckers don't want to). Quebec will be worse off and Canada will be better off. I sometimes wonder how things might have been different had the British not been gentlemen with regard to their conquest of Quebec (The Quebec Act, for example). They should have imposed English on you joual jokes and deported ANYONE who didn't meaintain allegiance to England (all of which was standard practice at the time).
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
"(The Quebec Act, for example)"
Oh yeah that thing that lasted a decade because the Brits were deadly scared we would join the Americans in their revolution? Good example. Do you have more like that? Does Québec still own the Great Lakes area??
What I speak is french, which you likely do not even understand. Joual is a simple term for the Quebec argot. Argots (slang) exist in every region. Parisian slang certainly isn't much better.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon GDP per capita means NOTHING *when determining the creditworthiness of a state.* GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD! Ireland and the United States are EXCELLENT examples of this. GO STUDY ECONOMICS. Quebec is an economic FAILURE (high debt, high taxes, low productivity, and a population that seems increasingly likely to LEAVE the PROVINCE). You don't get this (or refuse, I'm undecided). YOU ARE A FOOL (but thanks again for the laugh).
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Québec's net debt, while larger than the North American average, is just below the OECD average. It is problematic but nothing that resembles the debt of the most indebted European countries, which you compare it with. Québec's yearly deficit is under control, it's actually much lower than Ontario's atm, in a time where all provinces (including Alberta) are scoring deficits.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon the only reason you like "net debt" is because it APPEARS to give a better impression of the true story. Fact is, Ireland's NET DEBT (lower than its gross debt) hasn't saved it from economic meltdown (and at $51,500, its GDP per capita is substantially higher than Quebec's). Same with Greece, its NET DEBT hasn't done it any favours. So what the hell is your point? Again, investor's DO NOT look at "assets." WTF? They look at credit ratings, TOTAL DEBT, GDP growth, debt-to-GDP, etc.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
You said : "deported ANYONE who didn't meaintain allegiance to England (all of which was standard practice at the time)."
They did with the Acadians. About 2/3 of them died as a result, something that should be considered an ethnicide. Thrilling that you believe it the way to go. Quite a crassy human being, you are.
Is your racism showing?
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon I love that you continue to IGNORE what is detrimental to your cause and exaggerate what you feel you can successfully twist. FAIL (of epic proportions too) What has Toronto ever done for Quebec? Easy -- it's something called "EQUALIZATION." LOL. Your grandiose assumptions that Toronto "depends" on the St. Lawrence waterway is laughable and speaks to your insular and HIGHLY misinformed character. Toronto's #1 industry is finance buddy.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
You argue like a 12 year-old, "FAIL", really? It's not even missing the "epic". *sigh
Ontario currently receives equalization payments. Ontario currently has a bigger yearly deficit. Ontario just had this auto industry saved by huged subsidies paid by the rest of Canada (which doesn't count as equalization, but is still nonetheless pretty much the same). Ontario currently has a higher unemployement rate than Québec. I've seen better examples of "dependence".
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon You are a hypocrite (and anyone who doesn't agree with you would presumably be called a 12 year old... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... I'm not insulted, pal). You freely admit that the international community prefers the status quo YET you claim Ottawa is responsible for Montreal's decline? Ummm... if the international community prefers the status quo, why is OTTAWA (and NOT the private sector/international community) responsible for Montreal's decline? YOU MAKE NO SENSE.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
You cannot read french but on the odd chance you can (or can use a translator), about the Québec debt, my point is better elaborated by economist Louis Gill in an article for Le Devoir. Simply google "Dette du Québec: changements comptables et mythes tenaces".
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Le Devoir is separatist propaganda -- everyone knows that! Nonetheless, the fact that Louis Gill even needs to address "myths" solidifies my point (there is ALWAYS a bit of truth in everything). International investors, for right or wrong, buy into myths, they buy into hubris, speculation, etc. Do you follow the stock market? There is absolutely NO rationale for how it behaves at times. I read EVERYTHING I can (even opposing viewpoints -- unlike you, obviously).
willham95 6 months ago
@Vineon Am I crass? Absolutely. Do I speak English? Well, I'm a dual British/Canadian citizen and my mother is from LONDON, ENGLAND, so I certainly hope so (oh, do you want me to send you a photocopy of my passport? You probably don't believe me, hahahahahaha). Question for you pal, if -- by your own admission -- the international community is comfortable with the status quo, why do you foolishly advocate Quebec independence?
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
I asked if you speak REAL english following your ridiculous assumption that I don't speak REAL french because I live in Québec. Apparently, it is quite clear you weren't smart enough to grasp the comparison.
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
You said : "the international community is comfortable with the status quo, why do you foolishly advocate Quebec independence?"
Because I believe it best for Québec. Because it is the natural next step to the recognition of nationhood. Because it is what a proud people does.
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
Besides, I am STILL waiting for a proof of that academic project you did that involved Cree and Mohawks leaders. Where is it, I've been asking for a while now. Any names to give, at the very least?
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon proper French: watch?v=uuR3hQ8O0C4
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
May I ask if the english you speak is "real" english? I assume you do not speak the variety spoken in England? Same thing with Québec and France. Same thing with Portugese shared between Portugal and Brazil... or spanish between Spain and South America.
It is fucking complete fallacy to claim a Québécois and a French person cannot understand each other. It is always amusing to hear this sort of argument coming from unilingual english people, such as yourself.
Vineon 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@willham95
"Your grandiose assumptions of Quebec's importance to Toronto are inflated and false."
Fact : Toronto is extremely dependent on the St-Lawrence waterway. I'm fairly sure every single person living there aknowledges that. Here's the kick, that river goes mainly through Québec. That, along with many other things spell one scenario : free trade. You know, the same free trade that's going on now.
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
"Basically what you're saying is Quebec (a province with a shrinking population of 7+ million) has done more for Canada than vice versa. LAUGHABLE. Keep on dreaming."
I never said anything of the sort.
In this order please :
1) Read
2) Understand
3) Reply
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Wow... thanks for the good laugh this morning. Do you not see how you twist the facts? Konrad Sioui is a tool, he only speaks Quebec-joual (the garbage you speak is NOT French, lol), he's not native, the Huron are separatists, etc. I'm not even gracing you with a debate or a response to that garbage. I tell you something (detrimental to your cause), you discount it as being false or by twisting facts. Your "brain" is clogged.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
You're the one that is twisting.
I said there are Huron-Wendat sovereignists not that they all were. The reason is, many of them, especially those not living on the island, live in Quebec City and are at least about as much french as they are Huron-Wendat. There are Québec sovereignists amongst most tribes by the way, including a few elected MPs and Members of the National Assembly.
And yeah, Konrad Sioui only speaks french and 2 or 3 words of english.
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
And it's certainly fact that the Huron-Wendat are likely the most metised of the 11 recognized First Nations in Québec (and one of the smallest). Most of their ancestral behaviours are sadly a think of the past, including their ancestral language, which none of them speak to my knowledge.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon People that know anything about economics certainly don't need to consult Wikipedia. You IMPLIED that Toronto needs Quebec more than vice versa, you stubbornly cling to your convoluted idea that "assets" actually mean anything in the eyes and minds of international investors (Hydro-Quebec would NOT save Quebec in the likely event of a default, I really laughed over that one), "per capita" GDP (the US' is supremely higher than Quebec's anyway) and assets "per capita" mean NOTHING.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
"You IMPLIED that Toronto needs Quebec more than vice versa"
I've said Toronto is heavily dependent on the St-Lawrence waterway. This much is true. I have no idea what Québec is dependent on Toronto for, care to share??
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
What assets like HQ allow, is a better credit rate and therefore better interest rates because assets are a certain guarantee of payment. In short, in the event of a disaster, they can be sold and loaners can get their money. They lower the risk. Of course this stuff is taken into consideration, what moron would think otherwise? Oh yeah, you.
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
"assets "per capita" mean NOTHING."
You are a complete idiot.
Per capita is the only proper way to make comparisons between states with very varying size, like you did between Québec and the United States. Most of the USA's states did not nationalize on the level that Québec did, not even close.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon I shouldn't say GDP per capita means nothing, but international investors don't look at it when determining the creditworthiness of a state (the United Kingdom, Ireland, and United States are excellent examples of this). But according to you, Quebec is "special" and somehow different from any other region in the world (meaning Quebec would avoid default or significant economic problems because of its "assets").
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
"(meaning Quebec would avoid default or significant economic problems because of its "assets")."
Never fucking said that.
I brought up its assets to relativize Québec's debt's weight. I'm saying that NET DEBT comparisons (which take assets into consideration), are a better tool of comparisons between countries than GROSS DEBT comparisons. They do use net debt comparisons in Europe btw. In North America, for some dumb reason, we prefer more flawed comparisons.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon And you're right about the tax base in Quebec, what's left of it (high income Montreal Anglos -- people you undoubtedly resent) DOES pay it's fair share of taxes (Quebec has some of the highest migration rates in Canada -- its salaries are sometimes a fraction of what is on offer in English Canada) but that hasn't stopped Quebec from realizing some of the lowest productivity in Canada yet some of the highest debt (serious economic challenges).
willham95 6 months ago
@willham
I don't resent anglophones at all. I know its always been very difficult for dumbasses like you to understand that Québec sovereignism can spawn from anything other than hatred but in most cases it does. Considering you likely still live in your mom's basement, I don't expect you to understand the natural desires for a nation to get more autonomy.
If I were an anglophobe, I very much likely wouldn't have learned the language and wouldn't participate in discussions in that language
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Is everything a big conspiracy to you? HAHAHAHA I'm actually pissing myself right now. Regardless of Sioui's competence in speaking English, he DID welcome Kate and William to Quebec by saying "YOU ARE THE ESSENCE OF CANADA." He presented William with a replica of a 1760 agreement between England and the Huron. Who cares if he speaks German, fact is, this kind of gesture is INCOMPATIBLE with the ideology of Quebec separatism.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
I never said anything about a conspiracy, what in hell are you talking about.
What I've said, is that the Huron-Wendat guy that met Princess Kate... is really much just a french Québécois with a hat made of chicken feathers.
There were many sovereignists that were entirely fine with the visit of Kate and William. This was the position of the Parti Québécois btw. Had they been in power, they likely would have hosted the royals all the same.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon if net debt was all that mattered, why is Ireland (whose net debt is LOWER than the UKs) in much more trouble than the UK? Net debt isn't everything pal, and to assume it is speaks to your incredible ignorance when it comes to comprehending economics.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
His conclusion, which was pretty much mine, simply states that while Québec's debt is problematic, it is clearly below the OECD countries average. He calculates it to be at about 32% of Québec's GDP while the average is 51%. Yes this includes the part of the Canadian debt that would belong to Québec if it were a country.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Louis Gill is but one of MANY individuals with some knowledge of economics. For every "Louis Gill" arguing otherwise, I can find a Michael Campbell, Jack Mintz, or even Maxime Bernier who argue that separation of the province of Quebec from Canada would be economic suicide. Transfers per capita don't mean much when some of the recipients (such as P.E.I) have 150,000 people. As a WHOLE, Quebec's 7.5 million inhabitants gobble up a SUBSTANTIAL portion of Canadian equalization payments.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Je doute que la plupart des économistes fortement contre l'indépendance du Québec croient qu'il s'agirait d'un "suicide". Il y a nuances à apporter entre croire que le Québec est économiquement plus fort dans le Canada et croire que celui-ci ne peut suivre sans lui. Cette dernière thèse, j'aimerais bien savoir qui la supporte. Probablement même pas Maxime Bernier.
Vineon 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@willham95
Vous dites : " Transfers per capita don't mean much when some of the recipients (such as P.E.I) have 150,000 people"
Quel idiot vous êtes. C'est justement à cause de populations aussi disparates que l'on se doit de préférer les comparaisons par habitant.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon And nice (but not really) avoidance of my question. If net debt were truly all that mattered, why is Ireland (with a lower net debt) in substantially more trouble than the UK--whose net debt is higher? These are questions for which you have no answers (because you are blind to ALL sides of the argument). Of course separatists would say and do anything to assure themselves (nobody else really believes in your crap) that their arguments are air tight, when in reality they are anything but.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Je n'ai pas trouvé de données spécifiques à la dette brute et dette nette de l'Irlande. Peut-être pourriez-vous les fournir? Comme vous n'aviez toujours pas compris la différence entre les deux termes il n'y a pas si longtemps, je mets en doute vos capacités à en faire un portrait représentatif.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Thank you for all the selective answers, the selective comprehension, the twisting, the hypocrisy, the endless contradictions, et cetera, but I feel -- especially in light of your most recent and entirely laughable game (responding in insignificant "Quebec-joual") -- the time has come to put my knowledge to better use. I don't debate with children (especially ones who are too ignorant, too blind, and too extreme for their own good). I only pray that you don't procreate.
willham95 6 months ago
@Vineon If you truly believe the French give two shits about your province, you're an even bigger fool than I initially thought. The French are concerned about their economy, their jobs, the delicate situation of the E.U, etc. While you're absolutely right that some may be sympathetic to your cause, rest assured there are countless more who support a united Canada (including the current French president).
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Je suis certain que les Français ne sont pas grandement mobilisés par la situation politique du Québec. Il demeure que lorsqu'on leur demande, ils sont sympathiques au mouvement souverainiste en majorité. Vous insinuez que la majorité appuie le Canada uni alors que le contraire est vrai.
Même si Sarkozy (présentement bien détesté par la plupart des Français) s'y oppose.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Until you actually open your mind and expand your thought processes (beyond the myopic glare of the Quebec sovereignty movement -- a passé concept at best), I consider myself as having won this one sided "debate" -- I'm extremely confident that any other reader of this would agree.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Vous dites : " I consider myself as having won this one sided "debate""
Bien entendu.
Vos connaissances économiques n'incluent même pas les plus élémentaires notions, par exemple ce qu'est la péréquation et vous connaissances sociologiques sur le Québec semblent encore plus limités.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Your arguments are always the same -- and will always be the same (this is symbolic of the myopic and simplistic nature of the Quebec sovereignty movement -- nothing ever changes). This makes for a very one sided, simple (easy), and boring debate. Grow up and as I say -- expand your mind! Thank God that out of the 39% of Quebeckers who do support sovereignty, the extreme ones (such as yourself) only make up a fraction of that number.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Vous dites : "Your arguments are always the same"
Évidemment. C'est si ceux-ci changeaient au gré des vents que vous devriez vous poser des questions.
D'ailleurs, j'ai au moins la prétention d'en avoir 'des arguments'. Les vôtres se refusent à toutes élaboration, tout approfondissement, toute analyse. En réalité, vous n'en avez pas... ou vous semblez incapable de les défendre.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon My supposed lack of comprehension with regard to economics (when in reality, you know absolutely NOTHING about ANYTHING) is a rich opinion considering you won't even answer my question about net debt... IF THE IRELAND'S NET DEBT IS LOWER THAN THE UK'S, WHY IS IRELAND (and NOT the UK) IN MUCH MORE ECONOMIC TROUBLE? I'll tell you why, because net debt is NOT everything in the eyes of international investors. To try and argue otherwise is simply and utterly STUPID!
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Montrez-moi donc ses chiffres concernant la dette Irlandaise. On en discutera ensuite. Le problème, c'est que vous avez démontré dans vos précédents commentaires être incapable de faire la nuance entre la dette nette et la dette brute d'un état. Voyons vos sources, d'abord, afin d'être certain que vous ne confondez pas les termes, encore une fois.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Yes, I've seen what you feel are "expert" opinions on that matter. They argue that UN law clearly states that lands which have ALWAYS been included in territories cannot be taken away. Yet what they fail to acknowledge is that over half of Quebec's current territory was NEVER included in Quebec's original boundaries -- think 1898 and 1912 additions.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
"Yet what they fail to acknowledge is that over half of Quebec's current territory was NEVER included in Quebec's original boundaries -- think 1898 and 1912 additions."
It was absolutely aknowledged in the document. Experts is without quotation marks, I have their names and you can look them up if you want : they all have a wikipedia entry. Not any Joe Bloes.
Certainly worth hearing out more than nobodies like yourself are, in any case.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon Go read a book on economics... you desperately need to. And yes, the net outflow of capital from Quebec started in the 1970s with the election of the PQ. Oh, but according to you, Ottawa is responsible for private sector and capital outflows from the province of Quebec. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... I'm sorry dude, but I've showed a few people your thoughts and we all agree --- Quebec must have some mighty fine drugs because you're delusional.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Vous dites : "Go read a book on economics... you desperately need to."
Ce commentaire vient d'un personnage qui ne comprend pas qu'il existe une différence entre la péréquation et la totalité des transferts fédéraux.
D'un personnage qui ne comprend pas la différence entre le terme 'brut' et le terme 'net'.
D'un personnage qui prétend que les agences de notation n'ont pas d'influence sur les taux d'intérêts.
Revenez lorsque vous comprendrez ces quelques notions de base.
Vineon 5 months ago
@Vineon Again, the MAJORITY of Quebeckers SUPPORT remaining in Canada. Do you realize this? 50 years from now, Alberta may separate, so hypothetical future scenarios aren't really all that important (China may invade the States, etc). As of today however, support for Quebec independence remains BELOW the key 50% level.
willham95 5 months ago
@willham95
Aujourd'hui, l'appui à la souveraineté est effectivement sous la barre des 50%. Il s'agit d'un appui cependant qui change selon les années, selon la conjoncture. Celui-ci était monté à 70% suite à l'échec de l'accord du Lac Meech.
Vineon 4 months ago
@Vineon Move beyond your stale mentality... get off the whole "net" vs "gross" twisting (i.e YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE, BLA BLA BLA). I understand the difference perfectly well... YOU don't understand that all I said before was that international investors DO NOT care SOLELY about "net debt." If that were the case, the UK would be in much more economic trouble than Ireland (here's a big hint: see PIGS - Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain).
willham95 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@willham95
@willham95
" Ireland's net debt is LOWER than the UKs"
Puis-je en voir les chiffres? Évidemment, une comparaison par habitant s'imposera immédiatement. Pas certain que vous avez pensé faire ces simples calculs, pourtant nécessaire à la compréhension.
Vineon 4 months ago
@willham95
And if past frontiers now matter more than current ones, can Québec claim Labrador back? Maybe it can even claim the Great Lakes area?
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon PS. Although Sarkozy isn't particularly popular in France right now, his views on Canadian unity have absolutely NOTHING to do with his low approval ratings. And besides, a week is an eternity in politics (anything can change). Who would have predicted the shattering of the Bloc Quebecois in the most recent federal election and the subsequent mutiny in the PQ which has driven that party's level of support to within striking distance of the Charest Liberals? ;-) THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Vous dites : "his views on Canadian unity have absolutely NOTHING to do with his low approval ratings."
Évidemment que non et je n'ai jamais dit ça, pauvre cloche.
Apprenez à comprendre ce qu'on vous dit avant d'y répondre.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon I want Quebec gone, don't get me wrong (WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE). Just realize, Quebec would be shattered economically and politically if it ever did separate and the already VERY HIGH "NET" outflows of capital and people from Quebec would undoubtedly accelerate. Oh wait, sorry, according to you, Ottawa is at fault for ruining Quebec's economic base (and not the private sector which you freely admit -- PREFERS THE STATUS QUO). You have absolute shit for brains.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
"VERY HIGH "NET" outflows of capital"
Il n'y a pas de "net outflow of capital". Insinuez le contraire si ça vous chante mais ayez au moins la décence d'en fournir une source crédible.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon In regards to Legault and his "gang" I'm fully aware that his hypothetical party is currently nonexistent. My point was, a plurality of Quebeckers WOULD vote for such a party IF such a party existed (and that, in and of itself, is a dangerous blow to your cause). I think you should understand, I'm all for Quebec separating. It would make Canada wealthier and more productive for starters. Nonetheless, I'm just pointing out the obvious -- it would ruin Quebec financially and politically.
willham95 6 months ago
Comment removed
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon I get that you leftard victims don't really value the laws of economics, but seriously, come on... you're not even a soft nationalist but a reckless ideologue (and MOST Quebeckers, even most nationalists, don't take such hard-core views). I'm not saying the entirety of the Quebec sovereignty movement is "reckless" and "hard core" ... I am saying that about you though.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
You have no knowledge of economics whatsoever. This was made clear in both our conversations about the debt and credit rating agencies. I am certainly not a leftie. You likely couldn't argue for a second about equalization nor transfer payments either, I have a feeling your understanding of both is extremely basic.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon You have absolutely NO intuition and cannot argue against FACTS. For anyone who dismisses Montreal's demise relative to Toronto's rise as "Ottawa politics" is truly convoluted and effed in the head. I am actually smiling as I write this. You consider yourself some kind of warrior but in reality, you're nothing more than a misinformed victim who simply cannot accept that his little views are in the minority.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
You have no facts. You talk about equalization but you cannot make the difference between it and transfer payments as a whole. You talk of debt but you refuse to aknowledge the difference between a gross and a net debt. You talk about credit agency ratings saying they do not affect interest rates what that is what they fucking exist for. I honestly cannot fathom just how much of an ignorant you are and every single one of your so-called "facts" are easily debunked.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon finally, I know many proper European Francophones who think the joual trash you speak is an insult to their language. I didn't say mutual understanding was impossible (who's putting words in whose mouth now bitch? LOL), I said the trash you speak can HARDLY be considered French (one of the more refined languages of the world). Quebec joual garbage: watch?v=5lB-AX8_lSA
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
I know plenty of Americans who believe British english is ridiculous and actually fairly hard to decipher at times. I'm fairly sure the opposite is just as true. The french Québécois make fun of the Parisian french accent all the time and it happens to be reciprocal.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon and when you look at the total picture, Quebec truly would be an economic disaster without Canada. That's why Pequistes and Liberals have joined forces to build a THIRD party (that according to polls, would win a plurality of votes) in Quebec that would focus on the province's economy versus the old separatist/federalist debate. It seems EVERYONE but YOU realizes that Quebec has MAJOR economic challenges! A region with economic challenges is NOT worthy of independence.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
You said : "That's why Pequistes and Liberals have joined forces to build a THIRD party"
If you can't even follow Québec news properly, don't even bother. I'm sure you speak of François Legault and his little gang (which only so far seem to include one person : Charles Sirois). They aren't a political party, if at least yet. They actually never made it clear if they wanted to be.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon especially when that region is dependent on 20+ million taxpayers keeping it afloat. YOU ARE A LAUGHABLE AND IGNORANT DISGRACE (and you're fucking dumb too).
willham95 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@willham95
François Legault still has Québec sovereignty as part of his ideals, it's just not part of its political campaign.
"especially when that region is dependent on 20+ million taxpayers keeping it afloat."
Again, this is wrong. Now when 5 other provinces receive higher transfer payments per capita than Québec does.
Vineon 6 months ago
@willham95
This video you've shown, oh cretin, is no example. It showcases the french Québécois accent, not "joual". Joual would be extreme slangish quebecois french, one you wouldn't ever hear on tv shows like this one but only on a few sitcoms. You don't even have a fucking clue what joual is. Moreover, that video is packed full of France people commenting..... and they are all praising the accent.
Good lord..
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon I don't speak just one language, but I admit -- I DO NOT speak Quebec's dialect. Everything about it repulses me (and most of my truly French friends). Remember, France abandoned Quebec for Louisiana and it's Caribbean colonies. Nicolas Sarkozy has smartly snubbed your pathetic movement. What makes you think true Francophones give two shits about leftard "conspiracy" degenerates like you? HAHAHAHAHAHA! (and yes, anyone who assumes "Ottawa" played a part in Montreal's demise is a fool)
willham95 6 months ago
@Vineon basically EVERYONE who is NOT a separatist supports my positions. Quebec's TOTAL debt is unsustainable without the Canadian taxpayer (27 million taxpayers funding 7.5 million... hmmmm... I hope you can see who is the bigger payer). Quebec's taxes are among the highest in North America and yet its workforce is among the least productive (these are HUGE economic challenges for Quebec, but they're masked as long as Quebec remains apart of Canada).
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
You said : "basically EVERYONE who is NOT a separatist supports my positions. "
First off, this is akin to a pro-life person saying "everyone that isn't pro abortion supports my positions". Thankfully in Québec and quite a few economists, that put forward a favorable argument for sovereignty. This is perfectly normal, because half the population supports it. In Canada, it is no wonder that Québec sovereignty isn't ever properly argued, not a single soul would support it.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon half the population supports it? Try 39% buddy. The MAJORITY --50+%-- DO NOT support sovereignty. Nice try.
willham95 6 months ago
@willham95
Vous êtes un cancre en matière de langue française, ne venez quand même dire que vous ne croyez pas que 'stationnement' signifie 'parking'. Qu'en savez-vous? Vous ne parlez même pas le français. Maintenant, prenez un dictionnaire français en ligne et vous y trouverez tout de suite le terme.
Vineon 6 months ago
@Vineon and true to my suspicions (regarding your obvious lack of self-esteem and incredible insecurity), I see my jokingly used "joual" continues to irritate you. I FUCKING LOVE IT! :-D The fact that you couldn't see this for what it was (a complete mockery of you), really shows how pathetic and dumb you are. Go read a book (and one NOT written by a separatist or someone foolish enough to be sympathetic to one). Open your mind, lol.
willham95 6 months ago
@Vineon Finally, any region that is dependent on another (no matter how small) is simply NOT worthy of separating. Let's say Quebec were the second LOWEST recipient of transfer payments, fact remains, Quebec depends on Canada (no matter how small and insignificant). If Quebec were an Île-de-France or a République et Canton de Genève, perhaps you could make an economic argument for separation.
willham95 6 months ago