Quebec

First
Eruve
And what did happens at the end? They won their Freedom and are no longer under the ruling of britain.

Juntel
I think I just won't vote next election. What's the point of it anyway? We're not voting for the best, we're voting for the less bad.

Johnny
Now, did you think about debating in french? You said you would

"Now, even if the separatist forces put all this into preparations beforehand, they CANNOT establish formal treaties, loan agreements, etc., etc. until they have OFFICIALLY separated."

If we agree about the difference between a "yes" and the separation, that point is over.

"Fourthly, also regarding the trade issue, it is VERY presumptuous to assume that treaties with Canada will be reached within the forseeable future of separation. There will be a HUGE amount of resentment and general "bad blood" between Canada and Quebec, and my guess is that the only thing Canada will be negotiating for is free passage to the Maritimes through Quebec - and we do have the States for that."

That's how you feel. I would think it would be the opinion of most Ontarians too. But there's more to Canada than Ontario. And in the eventuality that we do the separation in a friendly manner (i.e no civil war!, no supreme court etc) Why would you resent us? Everybody would have to agree that this is for the best. I know it's not a good comparison but think of it as child leaving the family home early (like 18 or so). Sure, his parents are not going to take it too well at the beginning. But then they'll have to acept his choice and they'll still love him anyway. First few weeks will be hard, but then he'll get by and his parents will be proud. The comparison is not good cause Canada would be more like the brother and not the parents. But still I think it can make us think about it.

"Secondly, although the money would technically still be there to be taxed, the cycle would be interrupted for an indeterminate period of time."

That's sure, but I don't think that legally Canada could retain that money, it would have to give it back plus interests.

"Now, would a soldier who signs up to defend Canada, under the Canadian flag, be more likely to be federalist or separatist?"

Sorry to disapoint you but I have 6 friends that are in the canadian forces and they are among the strongest separatist I know.

"Also, you would have to re-enlist all of those soldiers - unless Canada is to maintain a contingent in Quebec."

It's far from the worst problem we would have to face

"And once it is no longer on Canadian soil, it would most likely be shut down and sold."

Probably to us

"And we would surely retain a part of of military equipment."

"Perhaps - if you buy it."

In case of a divorce, both side retain about as much as they invested. I think that it would be the same, but I'm really not into laws so I don't really know about that.

"He should have ideas written down, but he can't spring into action on most things until AFTER a "yes" vote."

That exactly what's I'm saying. We need a "yes" vote before preparing official separation.

"And remember that the attitude of Canada towards Quebec will most likely be that of a spouse who has just been served divorce papers."

Some divorcees can still talk to each other and get along very well. And yes, at the other side, some (most?) can't just stand each other.

IP

I just think it's utopic to think a separation can immediatly follow a "yes". You still have lots of things to decide, deal... etc.

Remember that a referendum has no more legal value than a big scale survey (and that's what it is anyway). This is not election. I'll just give you an exemple with the Harel's project. The project is to unite all cities near Quebec in one big "Quebec city". All cities voted against at 80%+ (Our city voted at 97% against) But still the project holds because they don't care of what we think. Referendum have no political power except to say "Hey you, listen to us, that's what WE want"

So that's to say it's nearly impossible to declare separation right after a "yes" and survive as a country

Johnny

When you bold, use capital B instead of b. The latter doesn't seem to work.

And for your question about how far should the two be, IMHO, it should at least 4 or 5 years. Maybe more.

That's all I have to say, for now!

"Now, did you think about debating in french? You said you would"

I thought about it, and decided after much thought that it wasn't worth the effort. If you want translations of specific phrases or ideas, that I can do.

"If we agree about the difference between a "yes" and the separation, that point is over."

I suppose, to a large extent, it is.

"That's how you feel. I would think it would be the opinion of most Ontarians too. But there's more to Canada than Ontario."

I don't live in Ontario. I live in Saskatchewan, and that's the opinion of most Saskatchewan residents too, as far as I can tell.

IronParrot lives in Alberta, and it seems that that's the prevalent view there.

So yes, there is more to Canada than Ontario, and Ontario's the least of your worries. Everyone else is going to be way more pissed off.

"And in the eventuality that we do the separation in a friendly manner (i.e no civil war!, no supreme court etc)"

Doubtful, but for the sake of argument...

"Why would you resent us?"

On a visceral level, because you're snubbing your nose at us. Don't ask for "justification" on this... it's a gut feeling.

"Everybody would have to agree that this is for the best."

Absolutely not. That's an out-and-out lie.

"That's sure, but I don't think that legally Canada could retain that money, it would have to give it back plus interests."

That's hilarious. That's bleepin' hilarious.

Firstly, if worst comes to worst, Canada would apply any revenues earned from taxation of Quebec to your share of the nat'l debt.

They would most likely claim all tax revenue as their due until the point when Quebec begins to provide its own services.

Interest? Cows will fly on their own power first.

"Sorry to disapoint you but I have 6 friends that are in the canadian forces and they are among the strongest separatist I know."

Now this confuses me. Are they just there for the money *ROFL*? Seriously, why would you want to serve under the flag of a country that you want no part of?

"It's far from the worst problem we would have to face"

You miss my point. That's only one of many. I used it as an example.

"Probably to us"

At your expense.

"In case of a divorce, both side retain about as much as they invested. I think that it would be the same"

Doubtful. I'm not saying it's impossible that you could inherit a share of the Canadian government - stranger things have happened - but I very much doubt that you'll get away with that much.

"That exactly what's I'm saying. We need a "yes" vote before preparing official separation."

"And for your question about how far should the two be, IMHO, it should at least 4 or 5 years. Maybe more."

Not how far SHOULD they be - "should" is worth NOTHING - it's how far WILL they be. I very much doubt that the Quebec government-in-waiting will wait until all preparations are made. It's a matter of the extremists.

"I just think it's utopic to think a separation can immediatly follow a "yes". You still have lots of things to decide, deal... etc."

Which was precisely the problem with the Bouchard-Parizeau plan back in 1995.

"Remember that a referendum has no more legal value than a big scale survey (and that's what it is anyway). This is not election. I'll just give you an exemple with the Harel's project. The project is to unite all cities near Quebec in one big "Quebec city". All cities voted against at 80%+ (Our city voted at 97% against) But still the project holds because they don't care of what we think. Referendum have no political power except to say "Hey you, listen to us, that's what WE want""

Actually, a referendum does cause a decision to be made. What you're thinking of - a large scale survey - is a plebiscite. There's a difference.

"So that's to say it's nearly impossible to declare separation right after a "yes" and survive as a country"

My point exactly.

Johnny

"I don't live in Ontario. I live in Saskatchewan, and that's the opinion of most Saskatchewan residents too, as far as I can tell."

"IronParrot lives in Alberta, and it seems that that's the prevalent view there."

"So yes, there is more to Canada than Ontario, and Ontario's the least of your worries. Everyone else is going to be way more pissed off."

Just to tell you I knew you were not from Ontario.

"On a visceral level, because you're snubbing your nose at us. Don't ask for "justification" on this... it's a gut feeling."

We could say that's a part of why we want separation in the first place.

"Interest? Cows will fly on their own power first."

Kewl... I'm eager to see that

"Now this confuses me. Are they just there for the money *ROFL*? Seriously, why would you want to serve under the flag of a country that you want no part of?"

For the money and for the trip of it. Ok, now I can just say "Hey I told you!". We're different in that point. One man entering army in Canada would do it to serve under the flag. It's a normal feeling when you like your country. Here in Quebec it's completely different. Just remember conscription. My friends do it (mostly) for the ca$h and to have the chance to see the world. In no way it's to serve for the country.

"Doubtful. I'm not saying it's impossible that you could inherit a share of the Canadian government - stranger things have happened - but I very much doubt that you'll get away with that much."

Again, it depends on how the separation is done. If a civil war begins, it's sure that we won't have anything from CAN, i'm not a fool. ( Fat middle)

"Not how far SHOULD they be - "should" is worth NOTHING - it's how far WILL they be. I very much doubt that the Quebec government-in-waiting will wait until all preparations are made. It's a matter of the extremists."

A full mandat could prove useful but 3 years would do most
of the work.

IP

"Which was precisely the problem with the Bouchard-Parizeau plan back in 1995."

I agree with that... But that was not the only problem.

"Actually, a referendum does cause a decision to be made. What you're thinking of - a large scale survey - is a plebiscite. There's a difference."

What the difference? I know that the exemple I'm giving is true. We did take a referendum and they just don't care of what we have to say.

"So that's to say it's nearly impossible to declare separation right after a "yes" and survive as a country"

"My point exactly."

At least we agree on that

"What the difference? I know that the exemple I'm giving is true. We did take a referendum and they just don't care of what we have to say."

A referendum is basically setting up for a request to the United Nations for an independant nation status... at least, as far as I can tell. The reason no one cares is because YOU LOST.

(Forgot some stuff)

"We could say that's a part of why we want separation in the first place."

To aggravate the rest of the country? That doesn't seem very wise...

By the way, the exemple I told you about referendum was the one about Quebec city (Harel's Project). All cities voted against at a mean 90%. She don't care and will do it anyway.

Second point, That not OUR country. Why should we care?

I think we're talking two different kinds of referenda (referendums? referendi?) here. On the one hand, there's the separation thing, which may or may not carry weight with the UN (ONU ), depending on whether it passes and if so a what majority (I don't think 50%+1 will cut it with the UN). On the other there's the local thing about the megacity. That's not a very official thing if Harel is just going to ingnore it... It also doesn't seem very wise politically. Don't the PQ think they'll lose votes over this? I also see a good bit of irony in the situation. Here's the good old PQ, whose raison d'etre is to separate from Canada, trying to force cities to merge, while these same cities argue that they could better look after their own interests as separate entities!

"We could say that's a part of why we want separation in the first place."

"To aggravate the rest of the country? That doesn't seem very wise..."

"Second point, That not OUR country. Why should we care?"

A few things on this...

Firstly, you either missed or overlooked my point about the difference between "motive" and "side-effect". You say that you want separation to piss off Canada... That's roughly akin to quitting school to piss off your parents.

Secondly, if you want to have any form of trade relations with us, you'd BETTER care...

(Dang it, keep forgetting stuff)

And the "referendum" you refer to is a plebiscite... it's more or less an opinion poll.

You misunderstood me Johnny... I don't say that we want separation to aggravate the rest of the country

here's the first comment

- On a visceral level, because you're snubbing your nose at us. Don't ask for "justification" on this... it's a gut feeling.

- We could say that's a part of why we want separation in the first place.

I was meaning that it's a gut feeling too. Feeling that we never were really accepted, that we are different that you do whatever you can to make us mad at you... etc. These are feeling, most probably far from reality but they still come from somewhere, something. I mean we may be "over-reacting" but some things did in the past just point at this. ( Nuit des longs couteaux etc.)

I still insist that in no way we want separation just to piss you or aggravate you. We want to be in our own country. We've been living in your's for too long.

Eruve I don't think Bouchard will take us to separation. Or it will fail if he tries. He's not been doing anything the people wants. No money for shcools, no money for health, supporting Harel's project... That's too much.

You have the "gut feeling" you should have a country of your own...

And we have the "gut feeling" our dollar really should be a lot higher.

Can we really do anything about it? Solutions are rather limited, shall we say...

We can't do anything for the dollar. We can do something about our country. Or at least we can try.

You really must be clearer... I guess it's excusable in this case.

"We can't do anything for the dollar."

Sure we can. We can lobby currency traders to raise the price on it, we can provide positive news about our economy, we can do all sorts of things.

Well... what are you waiting for?

Nothing.

So... I don't hear any increase in the dollar value. Are your efforts not as successful as you wished?

Hey, how are you all doing in this thread!?

Take some vacations, it did me well!

I'm just posting here to change the title: was tired to see my nick up there...

Shanamir, I hope you're just being silly.

If not, then you're going to need another lesson in economics.

Oh, and about a vacation...

I'm heading to Calgary for a week, starting tomorrow (in 10 minutes, it'll be today), and I don't plan to check in on this board while I'm there (unless there's something REALLY juicy).

And after that, it's football...

Good vacations to you sir.

And for myself. Being a student, I'm not allowed vacations you know. School for 8 months then work 4.