A Usenet persona calling itself Oci-One Kanubi wrote:

BCITORGB, don't waste yer time arguing with Weiser on this. The rag he
is quoting is obviously some wing-nut publication, because they don't
even have a fact-checker to read the article for internal consistency.

Darn that Associated Press, they are SUCH a fly-by-night organization...


I mean, consider this: the author asserts that Canadians pay (on
average) 48% of their income in taxes, "partly for health care". Then
she asserts that the Ontario gubmint spends 40% of tax revenues on
health care. Then she expostulates: "Wow! Forty-eight percent of
income for health care that you can't get when you need it. What a
bargain!"

Actually, that was me expostulating. Watch for the quote marks...

As for the statement, it's true, if somewhat ambiguous. Canadians pay 48
percent in income taxes, and for that 48 percent they get (in part) health
care they can't get when they need it. They do likely get other things like
roads and condoms too, but the point remains: They pay for universal health
care that they can't get timely access to because, well, it's socialized,
and as anyone with half a brain knows, socialism doesn't work, ever. It may
appear to work for awhile, but eventually the whole system fails because of
the "free rider" syndrome. If you can get it for free from the government,
why bother to work to earn it?

I mean, gee-Zeus, that is just too ****ing inumerate for words! 40% of
48% is about 19% of Ontareans' income spent on health care, not 48%!
This idiot author is arguing from completely baseless figures. And the
publication may very well be deliberately ignoring the arithmetical
stupidity, deliberately skewing the facts of the story, in order to
make some kind of right-wing partisan point.

And Scott is moron enough to read and believe this ****.

And you're too stupid to parse a post properly, much less comprehend the
finer points involved.

Please, trust me: don't waste yer time arguing with a narrow-minded
Tory(who evidently cannot even perform the simple mathematical
calculation needed to expose his sources as bogus) and non-boater (who
is exercising his legal right to be a rude mother-****er by intruding
on a newsgroup dedicated to a sport he does not even participate in)

Ah, but *participation* is not the metric for posting to RBP, "interest" in
paddling is. And I'm intensely interested in paddling (which, BTW, I have
"participated"in in the past), considering how often I have to personally
deal with rude mother-****ers like you who illegally intrude on my privacy
by trespassing on my private property.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser