What is your utopia?

LaCi - posted on 05/25/2010

I think that's something most of us can agree on, regardless of political affiliation ;)

Becki - posted on 05/25/2010

Laci we are close to living in that country and it is sad : (

LaCi - posted on 05/25/2010

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure I live in that country, Becki. Even more unfortunate is the fact that those who are doing the thinking are incompetent.

Becki - posted on 05/25/2010

Go to somewhere else where people can not think for themselves and need others to think for them.

ME - posted on 05/25/2010

Thanks Kathy, that was very informative!

Kathy - posted on 05/25/2010

Hi Diane,

Thanks for reminding me – yes, add housing and education.

In my eyes, the difference between alcohol and cigarettes is that with alcohol there are many situations where it’s an enjoyable social item. Abuse of alcohol is what causes the problems. I feel we need much more education on the moderate use of alcohol, and definitely some research into what leads people to abuse alcohol. Smoking cigarettes is a health hazard, pure and simple, for the smoker and those around him/her.

With refugees, being a humane person, I see them as people who need help, not people who are intent on having the easy life in another country. A refugee is: “Any person who owing to a well founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his/her nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself/herself of the protection of that country.” (Refugee Council of Australia.). The Refugee Council of Australia has, as its theme, “Freedom from Fear” to emphasise the fragile and desperate situation of these people who appeal to us for help. I would have assumed that as a Christian, you would understand this.

As for feeding, clothing and educating refugees, they don’t just sit there with their hands out, you know. This is from the Refugee Council of Australia’s paper entitled Economic, Civic and Social Contributions of Refugees and Humanitarian Entrants (Feb 2010):
“Australia’s refugees and humanitarian entrants have found success in every field of endeavour, including the arts, sports, media, science, research, business and civic and community life. Refugees’ stories are extremely diverse; however, there are some commonly mentioned “ingredients for success” including having had community support; feeling motivated to “give back” to society; and having access to training, English classes, mentoring and cultural, sporting and volunteering activities.”

Australia’s refugees are mainly from middle eastern countries. I’m not au fait with America’s issues with people from Mexico, but I doubt very much if the entire population of Mexico is planning on becoming refugees!

OK, now let’s talk about prosperity. The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite statistic used as an index/glossary to rank countries by level of "human development" and separate developed (high development), developing (middle development), and underdeveloped (low development) countries. The statistic is composed from statistics for Life expectancy, Education, Standard of Living and GDP. These are the first 20 countries in the 2009 HDI:

Norway
Australia
Iceland
Canada
Ireland
Netherlands
Sweden
France
Switzerland
Japan
But it’s incomplete to look at financial prosperity alone.: Another useful index is the “Happiness Index.” Naturally, this is qualitative, rather than quantative. This statistic is compiled from responses to the survey question: "Taking all things together, would you say you are: very happy, quite happy, not very happy, or not at all happy?". The "Happiness (net)" statistic was obtained via the following formula: the percentage of people who rated themselves as either "quite happy" or "very happy" minus the percentage of people who rated themselves as either "not very happy" or "not at all happy". This is from: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/lif_ha... The first 10 countries on this index are:

Iceland:
Sweden:
Denmark:
Netherlands:
Australia
Ireland:
Switzerland:
Norway:
United Kingdom:
Venezuela

Socialism is not a hard philosophy of fixed doctrine and program, its subcategories advocate a degree of social interventionism and economic rationalization, usually in the form of economic planning, sometimes opposing each other, so it’s hard to actually find specific countries that practice socialism. On this site: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_I... is a list of those countries who are members of the Socialist International. I should add that that when I say “Government” I mean the people, those who elect the government, as that’s where power lies. And I still insist that the people have a responsibility to assist those who need help, and I strenuously object to your comment about those who just do not work. I’ve been on unemployment benefits, and let me tell you it wasn’t that I chose too, but I was so glad I had welfare. to assist me through a rough time. And I’ve known plenty of highly paid executives who do bugger-all. So please think before coming out with such sweeping generalizations.

You mentioned unemployment rates: Norway 3.3%, Denmark 4.2%; Australia (my country) 5.5%, your country (USA) 9.95. The first 2 countries are regarded as countries with socialist/social democrat countries, the next 2 are not. So the nature of government doesn’t necessarily reflect issues such as unemployment.

There’s no need to worry about control of wages etc – that’s an issue that should be determined by worker-led unions. I would be far more worried about corporations having more power than citizens.

Oops, this has gone on so long, but you sounded interested, Diane, so I thought I’d give a few facts to back up what I base my opinions on.

Diane - posted on 05/24/2010

Kathy said, “- universal health care - health care is the right of everyone, not just those who can afford it;”

Curious, do you also think housing and education would also be rights? Explain if you could either way.
“ban cigarettes completely;”

Would you also ban alcohol since it kills innocent people on our highways, and if there are cases of domestic violence, alcohol is usually a factor? Why just cigarettes?

“welcome refugees. Don't waste money on keeping them out, but be humane. Their needs will boost the economy and their skills and experience should be used in the workplace;”

Curious, would you take on the population of Mexico, food, house and educate them? If they could load them up on boats and get them all there…would that be ok with the citizens of Australia?

If course their population is 110 million plus…so you would have to hire a lot more training programs…and come up with a whole lot more jobs.  Who needs to take risks with socialism.

“factual sex education in schools;”

What would you include?

“Governments have a duty to assist those who need help.”

And do they also have the right to tell you how to live and to take what you have worked for? Should doctors make as much as plumbers in your world? Could you give me an example of a country who has prospered that was socialist. I think history shows it has not worked. What is the sense of penalizing the hardest workers in order to support the ones who just do not want to work. If you look at most socialist countries the numbers of those who do not work is high. Would you also force people to work or just expect them to be taken care of? Just keep raising taxes…its enoramously high in socialist countries. I read somewhere that in Denmark there is a tax of 200% on a new car.

You asked, “If the projects require higher taxation so be it,”

Until what, you take everything everyone makes? How much is too much with you guys?

LaCi - posted on 05/24/2010

In my utopia everyone gets what they need. In my utopia there is a basic level of respect for human beings many people's mothers apparently forgot to teach, and with that, a desire to help your fellow beings. Nature would be held in high regards. With those things, I think all else is basically taken care of.

Kathy - posted on 05/24/2010

I'm in Australia. My thoughts are:
- universal health care - health care is the right of everyone, not just those who can afford it;
- bolster the public school system. Stop paying anything to private schools;
- ban cigarettes completely;
- support for those who need it - homeless, street kids, drug addicts, the unemployed;
- more funding for training programs: employers are always complaining they can't get staff!
- welcome refugees. Don't waste money on keeping them out, but be humane. Their needs will boost the economy and their skills and experience should be used in the workplace;
- factual sex education in schools;
- become neutral, like Switzerland;
- my utopia would be basically socialist - some things are too important to be left to to corporations. Governments have a duty to assist those who need help.
- If the projects require higher taxation, so be it. After all, taxation is what pays for things. Big businesses will not be given concessions, especially the mining industry!


Lots more but this is a start...

Rosie - posted on 05/23/2010

I am a Christian so I believe that the perfect world would be like it is in the Bible and what and how Jesus would want us to live. Everyone would believe and love Christ, men would love and treat their wives like they love themselves….wives would also respect and submit to their husbands…….(oh here it comes Mary LOL) and all children would respect and honor their mothers and fathers. There would be no sin, poverty, no premarital sex, adultery, lying, cheating, stealing. That means no pornography, no sexually sick music. People would love and respect their neighbors. There would be no locks on doors, and there would be no disease……no tears and there would be no need, no want for ABORTION. We would praise and give God glory……..for everything.-diane

insert muslim for christian and we would have pretty much the scenario that is happening in the middle east right now. that's working out pretty good don't you think? having everybody follow the same religion doesn't work too well, and doesn't that go against our constitution? i thought that the part about freedom of religion actually meant that people get to choose their own religion......

Rosie - posted on 05/22/2010

I know our health care is costly and we have problems. We needed reform, but not socialized medicine.-diane



gaaaaaaaarrrrrghh!!! run for the hills!!!socialized medicine!!!!!! EVIL EVIL socialized medicine!!!! i'm pretty sure that canadians and any other country that has universal healthcare would be doing that exact same thing except saying it about our system.



1. i would have universal healthcare

2. i would legalize gay marriage

3. legalize marijuana and tax the shit out of it

4. i would have more support for programs for inner city kids, young parents, drug/alcohol rehab, teaching more about birthcontrol-not just abstinence, domestic violence.

5. i would stop invading countries that don't need to be invaded or "help" countries by killing everybody there, maybe just offering support and wisdom instead of bombing the shit out of them would be alright.

6. i can't think of any more, i'm sure someone else will bring them up

ME - posted on 05/22/2010

"Mary said, “I'm a philosopher, it's what I do for a living.”
So I am supposed to know what your occupation is? I have no clue what anyone does here. How was I supposed to know that you are a philosopher? LOL"

No Diane, I don't think you know anything about anyone here...I think that's quite clear...

Krista - posted on 05/22/2010

I never said it was not beneficial for families to do this. So please post where I bashed this idea Krista.

I never said you did bash the idea. I said it was interesting that instead of even voicing a modicum of support for the idea, your immediate reaction was to pick it apart and ask about costs, leading me to question your priorities. I am glad to hear, however, that you do agree with me that it would be lovely for parents to stay home with their child for at least the first year.

And no, you didn't say explicitly that you were against sex-ed, but once again, instead of voicing even a breath of support for it, your first reaction was to bitch about the idea of sex-ed being mandatory, which led me to believe that comprehensive sex-ed was obviously not all that important to you, if you do not believe that it is important enough to be made mandatory.

LaCi - posted on 05/22/2010

Diane, and you ignored the fact that americans are going to china and mexico for healthcare. Google the extreme measures americans are taking to get treatment they can't afford here.



According to YOUR article, canadians are crossing the border simply because the government has arranged an agreement with these hospitals because it's cheaper than building more hospitals at present time. It has NOTHING to do with the quality of canada's healthcare system, It's entirely based in convenience for the canadian people. There is no need for EVERYONE to cross into the US for healthcare because they have perfectly good doctors there, its a matter of convenience for the people who live right next to us anyway.

ME - posted on 05/22/2010

That's true Laura...putting desperate people in prison IS a conservative goal...look at the war on drugs...suggesting that desperate women with no social supports are criminals is not terribly shocking coming from that political camp...

Isobel - posted on 05/22/2010

And if you really wanted to get rid of abortion you would have paid attention to my post...Abortion IS free in Canada...and that coupled with free access to doctors has resulted in Canada providing HALF the abortions of the U.S. If you throw free BC into the mix...that leaves almost no abortions...isn't that the goal...or do you really just wanna throw some desperate women in jail?

ME - posted on 05/22/2010

And by the way...Theocracies are explicitly banned by our constitution, which you claim to support...talk about hypocrits who can't read!

ME - posted on 05/22/2010

Just as I thought Diane...a Theocracy...Those aren't exactly UTOPIAS for most people (especially women)...but if you think it would be for you, then that's super...thank you for sharing your ideas...I wish someone had taken me up on my bet tho...Philosophers don't make tons of money...

Diane - posted on 05/22/2010

Laci maybe your family has never come over for health care but it is fact that others do. Google the subject and many articles about this come up that prove what I am saying is true. Of course not ever Canadian comes over, I never said that but enough come over that it is noticeable. You might have great health care but it is not perfect and wait times can be long. Why did he come over for a heart operation? I still say it’s hypocritical that he did. Surly you have excellent surgeons and do all sorts of heart procedures. What does the rest of the Canadian population do with similar heart operations….all come to the United States? Can they afford to do this>? What message does this send about your health care?

I have a family friend who lives in Hamilton and her husband came over for heart surgery as well. Also I have a friend whose daughter came over for a hip replacement. I am not saying it’s totally horrible…I am saying you have some problems. Why is that so hard to admit? Both these friends had to pay out of pocket for both procedures. It about broke my friends husband.
I know our health care is costly and we have problems. We needed reform, but not socialized medicine. And who knows what things are hiding in Obama’s plan. Hell his own administration can’t read. They never read the new Arizona law….and I doubt they have read the health care bill either.

They just want to win at any cost. It’s not about issues in America it’s about who can get in control and how much they can pass. It’s like the Arizona law. Washington could care less what is going on. And neither political party will touch this issue because they do not want to lose any votes that enforcing it would take away from getting party people elected. It’s a power game and we are chess pieces.

Mary said, “As I've explained to you many times...I'VE NEVER HAD AN ABORTION...I HAVE TWO BEAUTIFUL CHILDREN...I can be jealous of the Canadian's health care system, which is the envy of many americans, without wanting to have a free abortion. The irrationality never ends with you....”

The envy…….how many Americans then choose to go to Canada then Mary? If it’s free for them would it also be free for us if we went there? Just because something is free Mary does not make the care better. Obviously the guy in the video came to the US for this heart operation. What does that say? That Canada has no doctors that can do the procedure? That the wait time is to long? What?

It’s like the teachers and politicians who say public education is the best America has to offer and then they send their children to private schools. It’s hypocritical.

“No one has been talking about criminals...I don't see how criminals are relevant to the discussion that we've been having here..”

Aren’t criminals people Mary? Should they be treated in every way as equals? Our government does not treat people as equals. The hate crimes law gives minority groups extra protection under the law. They take the criminals voting rights away. The government takes rights away and they should for people who do not want to follow our laws. We should not reward lawbreakers Mary we should punish them.

Mary said, “I'm a philosopher, it's what I do for a living.”
So I am supposed to know what your occupation is? I have no clue what anyone does here. How was I supposed to know that you are a philosopher? LOL

I do not know what your husband does for a living…should I know that too?

All I did was challenge what people said here. Why is that wrong Mary? I will give my idea of utopia then…..and we will see how many from the LEFT who hate what I stand for….question what I write.

I am a Christian so I believe that the perfect world would be like it is in the Bible and what and how Jesus would want us to live. Everyone would believe and love Christ, men would love and treat their wives like they love themselves….wives would also respect and submit to their husbands…….(oh here it comes Mary LOL) and all children would respect and honor their mothers and fathers. There would be no sin, poverty, no premarital sex, adultery, lying, cheating, stealing. That means no pornography, no sexually sick music. People would love and respect their neighbors. There would be no locks on doors, and there would be no disease……no tears and there would be no need, no want for ABORTION. We would praise and give God glory……..for everything.

Now let’s see what kind of reaction I will get from this…………lmao, especially wives submitting to their husband.
And hey Mary I welcome criticism and questions….I don’t know why you do not like mine and think I shouldn’t question?

ME - posted on 05/22/2010

As I've already told you, Diane, I won't be wasting my time debating abortion with you anymore...you are a the most closed-minded individual I've ever "met", and the frustration is not worth it to me...but you were looking for an example of your bitchiness...so, how's this for starters?



"Ah Mary I know this might upset you but your country still does not kill the most unborn children by abortion. I am sure that just devastates you. Yes poor Canadians they have perfect health care the envy of the entire world……"



As I've explained to you many times...I'VE NEVER HAD AN ABORTION...I HAVE TWO BEAUTIFUL CHILDREN...I can be jealous of the Canadian's health care system, which is the envy of many americans, without wanting to have a free abortion. The irrationality never ends with you....



And...NO ONE told YOU what to do in AZ...we told you that there were other options for your STATE GOVERNMENT besides legalizing racial profiling...so, ummm...what's your issue again? Oh, right...you want to be able to tell every woman in the country what she can and cannot do with her body...ok...clear? YOU ARE THE ONE WHO IS TELLING PEOPLE WHAT TO DO!!! I know you don't believe in equal human rights (only in the rights of fetuses) but our constitution addresses that one, Diane,...you can't believe our constitution, and NOT believe in equal rights for all people...that's a logical contradiction...

No one has been talking about criminals...I don't see how criminals are relevant to the discussion that we've been having here...



And just so we're clear about what Utopia means...usually it means something like: what a perfect world would look like IF PERFECTION WERE POSSIBLE...I can like Rawlsian theory without believing that it's POSSIBLE to create that society overnight or even ever. I think it's a nice idea...I think it's an interesting thought experiment...THOUGHT Diane, not reality...I'm a philosopher, it's what I do for a living. Bringing this thought experiment up with teenagers or young adults is a fantastic tool for getting them to think outside the boxes of their short (mostly) sheltered lives. Once they do this, they realize that they could very well have been born with a dissability, or with a different color of skin, or into poverty, or in a different country (maybe Mexico for example), or (gasp) into a family of buddhists or atheists instead of christians...they discover that the ACCIDENT of their circumstances should NOT dictate their treatment in life...a lesson you have clearly never learned! It would be nice if you could learn it still...it would probably benefit your grandchildren, especially if they will be spending a lot of time with you...but old dogs and new tricks...ya know!?!?!?! (there's an example of MY bitchiness for you ;-)

LaCi - posted on 05/22/2010

Diane, are you at least opposed to hormonal methods of birth control?



My canadian family members visit the US frequently, and have never once used our healthcare system. They have their own, they have never complained of their own, and they have never had trouble getting the healthcare they need. I think it's a huge misconception that they need to come here, blown completely out of proportion. If he has the means, I'm sure he's seeking the best surgeon in the world, regardless of what country it may be in. People in the US travel to China for healthcare that isn't offered here, we travel to Mexico to get discounted medical treatment. Some people can only accept a world renowned surgeon. As for those who cross the border in ontario to avoid a wait, it's paid in full by their healthcare system. If all you had to do was travel a short distance to detroit to stay within covered services, who cares? They aren't border jumping, theres an agreement in place between the facilities and the government. Why is that a negative thing?

Diane - posted on 05/22/2010

Jenny I do not believe there could ever be a utopia because I believe like I said man is born evil. I said that in my previous post. I think if we all had a heart like Christ and lived the way he lived, that would be perfection. Although we might try, we could never meet that standard of righteousness.

“I do think that it's a little sad that instead of agreeing that it is beneficial to families for both parents to be home for the first year, your first instinct is to get all spazzed out about the cost. I thought you were all about family values, and would be all for a policy that would allow parents to spend more time with their newborns.”

I never said it was not beneficial for families to do this. So please post where I bashed this idea Krista. I only challenged the ideas and asked legitimate questions.

I was blessed to be able to stay at home with my children. I just became a grandmother and I will also take care of granddaughter so her mother can work a few days a week. She is fortunate I can do this and I am blessed because I also will be able to bond with my granddaughter.

I will say this. I think bonding with a child from age 1 to 2 is also beneficial. Do you get that option after you have paid into this package?

About birth control… For your information abortion is used by many women as a form of birth control, especially women who have more than two abortions. And statistics show that the majority of women get multiple abortions.

This is what you said Krista, “3. I would want all forms of contraceptives to be free, and for our children to receive comprehensive, fact-based sexual education from a young age. Opting-out would NOT be an option.”

You are pro-choice/abortion aren’t you? If you did your homework on this you would know that most women who get one abortion will get more. This is birth control, it is stopping pregnancies. So that would mean you would believe that the government would pay for abortions as well as other birth control options. It should be available for all women, its called equality, right?

You know what…you don’t you practice what you preach. Who said I was not for comprehensive birth control and teaching women about reproduction and especially about fetal gestation? Where did I say this Krista?

The clincher is this. The truth about everything should be taught and that goes for abortion as well. That goes for showing fetal ultrasound at various gestational ages. PP would oppose doing this. They do not want personhood associated with the child in the womb and abortion. They go into our schools systems now but nothing like that is taught.

Now again Krista….WHERE DID I SAY I WAS AGAINST TEACHING SEX EDUCATION? Post where I said anything like this. You are the one who is quick to point the finger.

You said this, “I'm just talking about teaching them proper biology, so that we don't have a bunch of sheltered idiots running around thinking that you can't get pregnant during your period, or that only "dirty-looking" people have AIDS.”

I agree but like I said everything should be taught. And that goes for what happens in the womb after conception and what abortion really is. People should know abortion is killing a living human being, that the life in the womb is not a rock, or some inanimate object, that after twenty days after conception the heart starts to beat. People need to know the medical facts, not some of them, all of them.

And Mary Elizabeth who is just so sweet had this to say. “Today I think we need protection from our government" Why, Diane? So you can tell us what to do???”

Me tell you what to do? LMAO

Isn’t that what you guys told me about the illegal issue in Arizona. You told me all sorts of things to do.

Diane - posted on 05/22/2010

Mary said, “If you are going to have a debate with people...you really should ATTEMPT to understand the opposite point of view first.”

Oh this is something you do yourself, right?

I addressed utopia…and the fact that we live in an imperfect world and there can be no such thing because of the way mankind is. What is wrong with that?

Did you quote Rawls because you agree with him or you disagree with him? Didn’t you really use his ideas as an example of what might work? You said in fact, “I like the idea.”

Do I believe in equal rights for all people? No.

I do not believe a murderer in prison who has taken a life deserves the same rights as a law abiding citizen.

I do not believe that a person who killed someone while they were under the influence deserves to ever drive again.

So there are many instances where there should not be equality.

I believe our Constitution however…and it is clear what citizens may enjoy in our country.

Jo said, “You come into this thread with your "interesting" as if you're some sort of authority on utopia, right, wrong and what will work and won't work.........and attempt to piss on everyone's idea of utopia, and you don't even state your own idea.”


I came into this thread to give my opinion the same reason I am sure why you are here. If you do not like what I say, ignore me. I am not an authority but you are not either are you?

I am challenging people’s views. Do you ever do that Jo? Have you ever challenged my views, say on abortion, illegal aliens? Ever been critical of anything I have said?

This is a PUBLIC FORUM where people interact and make CONVERSATION, or didn’t you quite catch that?

Jo said, “Your character is just so pleasant. (Sarcasm.) Are you always this bitchy or is it just with people who have their own minds, think for themselves and won't shove themselves up your ass until they tickle your sphincter?”

What a mouth you have. Wow. So ladylike.

I'm bitchy? What in my past post is bitchy my dear? Do you think everyone who disagrees with you is a bitch?

But I take that as a compliment. I don't think being a bitch is necessarily a bad thing.

If anyone has been aggressively mean by calling names and really not even addressing the issues at hand its not been me.

I am not asking you to agree or accept any of my views at all; I am here debating issues, and because I do not fall hook, line and sinker, because I believe Obama is a horrible excuse for a president.........I am bashed. Which hey its fine with me.

Mary said, “The Canadian gov't already does use tax money to cover abortions, since they are covered by the NHS...so, it's not that much of a stretch for a Canadian to include health care services in their utopia...Lucky Canadians “

Lucky? LOL

Ah Mary I know this might upset you but your country still does not kill the most unborn children by abortion. I am sure that just devastates you. Yes poor Canadians they have perfect health care the envy of the entire world……lets just forget all the people coming over to American because the wait line is to long.

http://indyposted.com/10208/canadian-big...

Don’t you guys in all Canada have any good heart surgeons?

LOL Boy if that does not raise questions I don’t know what would. A little hypocrisy wouldn’t you say?

And from CNN politics comes this.

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/0...

Isobel - posted on 05/21/2010

forcing women to pay for abortions only exaggerates the rich/poor cycle...those who can afford an abortion don't have too many children and can therefor afford to feed and educate them...those who can't afford an abortion have more babies, can't feed them, can 't educate them...and the system continues.

If you truly want to stop abortions...educate them, honestly and without bias, then allow EVERYBODY free access to birth control...without their parent's permission.

Isobel - posted on 05/21/2010

I hate to throw one more on but we have already determined that sex ed+free abortions+free doctors=less abortions...(cause Canada doesn't charge for abortions and in fact has no legislation regarding abortions and therefore have half the abortions per capita of America) it only seems to serve that if you add FREE BIRTH CONTROL into the mix we would = almost no abortions

forcing women to pay for abortions does not bring the number of abortions down. Education and medical attention do

Tanya - posted on 05/21/2010

Do you really think that if people are so lazy that they don't want to go to work they would have more babies. Work is 9-5 parenting is all day and you never get to call in sick

ME - posted on 05/21/2010

"You want a government that runs people’s lives, that tells them what they can and can’t do, what they can own and how much they can keep. You think this is utopia?

Today I think we need protection from our government"

Why, Diane? So you can tell us what to do???

Krista - posted on 05/21/2010

And if this was a working mother/father then who would fill their jobs while they were on vacation? And who would foot the bill for this lengthy leave? What about the family who has four, five or more children……? Do you think that people might abuse this system by having children to get out of going to work?

Well, if you had bothered to actually do a little bit of research before answering, you would know that the bill is footed via our Employment Insurance system, into which we pay via a small deduction off of every paycheque. So it's not as though I'm getting something for nothing. I've been working and paying into EI since I was 16. I claimed EI for about 8 months after I was laid off, back in 2004. And then I claimed it again as parental leave, from August of 2009 until just this past April, when I went back to work.

And who would fill their jobs? That would be an unemployed person who is looking for work. So, you will often see a job posted saying that it is for a one-year term to cover a maternity leave. This is often a very good opportunity for someone who is unemployed to gain some extra experience, and to hopefully translate that experience into a longer-term position, either within the same company or elsewhere. Usually if the person has done a good job, the company will do their best to keep that person on, even if it's in a different department.

And the neat thing is that you have to have worked X number of hours in the 52 weeks prior to taking your parental leave. So in the scenario of your person with 5 kids, they'd basically HAVE to come back and work for at least a year prior to going off on leave again, or else they would not qualify for their parental leave. Those cases are few and far between, however, as I can't imagine there are a whole lot of working mothers who are having more than 3 kids anyway. So you can't just have someone off on perpetual leave.

I do think that it's a little sad that instead of agreeing that it is beneficial to families for both parents to be home for the first year, your first instinct is to get all spazzed out about the cost. I thought you were all about family values, and would be all for a policy that would allow parents to spend more time with their newborns.

I am sure you also mean abortion as a form of birth control. So the government would provide free abortions, all birth control and who would pay for this? How would PP make their money then? LOL Or does the government take over PP?

Actually, I didn't mean abortion as a form of birth control, and I am REALLY starting to get pissed off at how you are always presume to know what I "really" mean. I say what I mean. Always. So just stop trying to read all kinds of hidden agendas into what I say, okay?

Now, getting back to my actual point, before you tried to derail it with your freakish obsession with abortions, I would pay for it via points #2 and #9 on my list. Cutting wasteful spending and keeping a tight leash on our politicians, and legalizing, regulating and taxing marijuana would MORE than provide enough money to completely subsidize contraceptive methods.

And birth control is useless if people don't know how to use it. Hence, the fact that comprehensive, fact-based sexual education would be mandatory. It's a public health issue, Diane. If people don't know how to prevent STDs, because their conservative parents didn't tell them, then they run the risk of contracting and spreading those diseases because they're too pig-ignorant to know better.

And once again, I find it both hilarious and alarming that you are so reactionary that you think it is some awful thing for learn the basic scientific facts about how their reproductive system works and how to prevent pregnancy and STDs. I'm not proposing teaching them sex positions and how to give a better blowjob, here. I'm just talking about teaching them proper biology, so that we don't have a bunch of sheltered idiots running around thinking that you can't get pregnant during your period, or that only "dirty-looking" people have AIDS.

?? - posted on 05/21/2010

I paid for my maternity and parental leave for 11 years before I applied for it. I think paying for 11 years to get 1 year (at 55% of your wages for the prior 52 weeks) is alright... and that's not all that much when you've only been working for min-wage.

ME - posted on 05/21/2010

Yeah, what is your idea Diane...Who wants to put money on a Theocracy? Anyone, anyone?...probably not...it's a sure bet...

Jenny - posted on 05/21/2010

And working parents in Canada foot their own bill for a year off by paying into the EI program. Maternity leave is the only time I've ever used EI and I've paid into it for 14 years.

As others said, do you have your own ideas Diane on your version of utopia (shudder) or are you just here to knock other's input?

ME - posted on 05/21/2010

The Canadian gov't already does use tax money to cover abortions, since they are covered by the NHS...so, it's not that much of a stretch for a Canadian to include health care services in their utopia...Lucky Canadians :-p

?? - posted on 05/21/2010

@ Diane:

How freakin predictable are you!!!!!!!!!!!!! HAHAHA

You come into this thread with your "interesting" as if you're some sort of authority on utopia, right, wrong and what will work and won't work.........and attempt to piss on everyone's idea of utopia, and you don't even state your own idea.

Your character is just so pleasant. (Sarcasm.) Are you always this bitchy or is it just with people who have their own minds, think for themselves and won't shove themselves up your ass until they tickle your sphincter?

ME - posted on 05/21/2010

There you go, accusing people of things they have not said again. NO WHERE did I say I was in favor of equal distribution of goods or services. I said JOHN RAWLS was in favor of FAIR distribution, and EQUAL rights, and that I liked the idea no matter how unreasonable it is...this post asks what your UTOPIA is, not what you think is possible. Tho..I'm assuming that you must be against equal rights for all people, since that seems to be what you took issue with...but honestly Diane...I am finding it harder and harder to take anything you say seriously...If you are going to have a debate with people...you really should ATTEMPT to understand the opposit point of view first.

Diane - posted on 05/21/2010

Interesting………..

Krista said, “I would amend the parental leave program so that EACH parent would get a year, and they could take it consecutively OR concurrently. It can be very isolating for a new mom to be by herself with a newborn, and I think it would strengthen families if the dad could be there as well during that first year.”

And if this was a working mother/father then who would fill their jobs while they were on vacation? And who would foot the bill for this lengthy leave? What about the family who has four, five or more children……? Do you think that people might abuse this system by having children to get out of going to work?


“ I would want all forms of contraceptives to be free, and for our children to receive comprehensive, fact-based sexual education from a young age. Opting-out would NOT be an option.”

I am sure you also mean abortion as a form of birth control. So the government would provide free abortions, all birth control and who would pay for this? How would PP make their money then? LOL Or does the government take over PP?

Interesting in your utopia that you FORCE people to do things.

You hop into bed with every citizen in the country assuming that you know what is best for them. Why do you force them to do this, what does it matter youre giving them free birth control anyway?

Mary said, “It's amazing how, when all of "your" privileges are gone, all of a sudden you're in favor of equal rights for everyone ;-)”

True if you have the mindset that what other people possess is rightfully yours. Equal rights should not include taking what someone else has worked for.

If you were in the most primitive society, and everyone started with nothing…and one clan or family built a mud hut and another clan wanted it, so they demanded the clan make them one, or hand the one they made over…….. this is not right. Is it right that the one clan be forced to make or give the other a mud hut?

If I build a million dollar house with my own materials and labor, or I pay good wages to have someone else build it for me.... what right would someone have who does not have one and wants one demands equality by forcing me to build it for them? Does everyone deserve a million dollar house?

If I lose all my money by investing poorly or by gambling….would equality mean that people or the government give the money that I lost back so that I would be equal again?

Things were never, are never and will never be equal. There are people who are hard workers who build their own fortunes and there are people who sit back do nothing with their hands out demanding everything. There are people who donate money to help others who do not have as much, and there are people who keep all they make and could care less about the less fortunate.

Should the family who has six kids be forced in a utopian society to give one or more to families who do not have any children?

The only way your society would work is if everyone had lobotomies and they took out their feelings and emotions. I would suggest reading the book , A Brave New World? This was a controlled society, just like the one many of you are suggesting here.

Jo said, All the people who think they can survive with less government - I don't think they'd ever survive.”

I think you are very wrong. I think you would see a lot more productive people and less sitting on their backsides doing nothing. Productivity would go up and people would barter for services. People would rely more on families and each other for survival.I think there would be more generous giving.

I think in some ways societies hundreds of years ago had it better. Look at the governments that have been evil……


I like what Thomas Paine said, "It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from his government."

http://infowars.net/articles/march2008/0...

“The more perfect civilization is, the less occasion has it for government, because the more does it regulate its own affairs, and govern itself; but so contrary is the practice of old governments to the reason of the case, that the expenses of them increase in the proportion they ought to diminish.”

“If we look back to the riots and tumults which at various times have happened in England, we shall find, that they did not proceed from the want of a government, but that government was itself the generating cause; instead of consolidating society, it divided it; it deprived it of its natural cohesion, and engendered discontents and disorders, which otherwise would not have existed.”

You want a government that runs people’s lives, that tells them what they can and can’t do, what they can own and how much they can keep. You think this is utopia?

Today I think we need protection from our government.

Krista - posted on 05/18/2010

That's really fascinating, Mary Elizabeth!

My perfect society wouldn't be drastically different from the one I live in now. There are a few things I would change, however:

1. I would amend the parental leave program so that EACH parent would get a year, and they could take it consecutively OR concurrently. It can be very isolating for a new mom to be by herself with a newborn, and I think it would strengthen families if the dad could be there as well during that first year.
2. I would require annual financial audits of federal and provincial government spending, and would appoint federal and provincial citizen panels, made up of a cross-section of citizens, to review budgets and cut down on wasteful spending. I feel that our politicians have spent so much time in this bubble of entitlement that they view completely unreasonable spending as perfectly fine.
3. I would want all forms of contraceptives to be free, and for our children to receive comprehensive, fact-based sexual education from a young age. Opting-out would NOT be an option.
4. I would encourage and provide incentives (tax breaks) for businesses to set up in rural areas, so as to improve the economies of those areas and to stop the perpetual "brain drain" to the cities.
5. Bike lanes. Everywhere. And high-speed rail in all cities.
6. The Bloc Quebecois would no longer have federal recognition. They are a party focused solely on Quebec -- why on earth should their leader be technically eligible to be Prime Minister?
7. I would encourage innovation and new technologies. Our economy is based so strongly on natural resources, but when our dollar climbs, we take a shit-kicking. I would try to diversify our exports so as to better weather these fluctuations.
8. I'd want stiffer criminal sentences for violent crimes. The fact that Karla Holmolka is walking free just nauseates me.
9. I'd legalize, regulate and tax marijuana, just like alcohol.

That's all I can think of right now.

ME - posted on 05/18/2010

John Rawls (political philosopher) suggests that we do a thought experiment to see what we want our society to look like. He says that, if we all started from "the original position" behind a "veil of ignorance" we would develop a system of "Justice as Fairness". I like the idea (as unlikely as it may be). If the people making the rules were not allowed/able to know anything about themselves at all, ie, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, income level, educational background, ability level, special talents they possess, etc. They would be likely to develop a pretty fair system of government. A fair system for distributing goods and resources, a fair system for access to land, to water rights, and energy; a fair system of education and for funding education; fair access to health insurance; fair access to employment or to employment training, etc. In addition, Rawls believes that we would set aside resources for the disabled to which only they would have access.

I'm relatively certain that if, for example, those making the laws knew nothing of their socioeconomic status, they would be likely to spend more money on social programs, education, and public resources (like museums, parks, etc.) than they would on the military (or at least the spending would be more equal). When I do this thought experiment with my college students, even the most conservative suggest what basically amounts to socialism. It's amazing how, when all of "your" privileges are gone, all of a sudden you're in favor of equal rights for everyone ;-)

LaCi - posted on 05/18/2010

haha. Jenny said it already.

Jenny - posted on 05/17/2010

http://www.thevenusproject.com/

?? - posted on 05/17/2010

Anarchy. Bring it on bitches.

All the people who think they can survive with less government - I don't think they'd ever survive. All the people who actually have a heart, care about their neighbour and truly love this planet and the human race, they will prevail. We'd be living amongst each other in peace and harmony... solving problems and communicating reasonably, where we can cast aside the petty selfish people to fend for themselves, and die for all I care, amongst each other.