Clanscorpia

I can still view HD images in other tabs so I havent got it yet, but that might be because Im in Ontario.

The difference is in those countries it isnt rare, its happens nearly everyday in the middle east.

Not if the fries are made properly. Thats why you need to go to an actual poutinerie where the fries are extra crispy to compensate for the gravy

Going full send and breaking my arm skiing

When I broke my wrist and elbow I was in the hospital for 8 hours, and I had to come back because the idiot doctor forgot I told him my wrist was in pain and I couldnt move it, and even after I made them take an Xray, they still said it wasnt broken at all, and then I get a call with them telling me my scaphoid bone was broken and I needed to go back so I could get it immobilized. Then I paid 40 dollars for a brace I wore for a week before I got my cast, with a ridiculous week long wait which should have been 2-3 days. The doctors even sat in the ER while I waited an hour for my xrays which were literally on the screen. They really dont care and are extremely lazy in ERs here. When I had a severe case of poison ivy on my face it took them 6 hours to spend 5 minutes trying to tell me it was sunscreen (I knew it was poison ivy, I touched it that day), and gave me prednizone. During that time my face and neck could have swollen shut, but it wasnt immediately life treating so I had to wait a ridiculous amount of time. All around here the non life threatening care here is total crap, and I would much rather pay 20 dollars to get my care faster.

Also are extremely in debt, have high taxes, and are fairly single cultural. The US is extremely broad with a huge amount of issues that can cause those with healthcare being a small part of it. ITs not a true free market system because as you said, things like forced private heath insurance bills are caused by the government putting influence on the system driving prices up.

About half that in most provinces, some of them do, and about a third, on top of the massive taxes we pay.

Its not legal language, its Wikipedias tendency to overuse unnecessary amounts of complicated language that are not needed making basic comprehension difficult without reading. Its not an imagined power, its the legislature that can push the laws and argue this, they are the defendants in the cases going to the court, and can provide evidence against the plaintiffs case.

Currently in high school so no I do not but I can google stuff which is nice about having the internet. So looking at it quickly through the overly complicated language of wikipedia I can see that the test is basically seeing if the law will have an overly harsh effect on people and making sure the law doesnt overstep exactly what needs to be done. But looking at this even it is extremely vague and basically goes with whatever side is in power for minimizing free speech as it still uses the language "free and democratic society" which is highly subjective as to what you believe that means. It also talks about a balance, which with a small enough group at the other end, or enough power on one could sway towards one end.

Except it can be constitutional, it literally says their in the constitution the laws can be passed, its in the first charter.

The laws can be changed to anything that "Charter rights can be limited by other laws so long as those limits can be shown to be reasonable in a free and democratic society." Meaning any of those laws can be changed about free speech including hate speech. Going back to a place like Soviet Russia where saying anything against the state could get you killed or sent to a Gulag shows how a majority government can push down the minority for what the powerful/majority believe in, stifling conflicting views from going through. And if we ban anything that has no science backing it opinions and many left ideas which are currently the "majority" about white people would also be hate speech, but these are not charged as such, showing an inequality in the treatment of hate speech. Laws should place everyone equality not some people given benefits because of stuff that happened in the past.

Yes I did the results literally said at the end that private institutions beat them by around 11% in almost every statistic for performance. Considering how much we pay in taxes for healthcare it doesnt end up being that much more for the average person with significantly quicker times and quality. And no its not, the reason why medication and its associated costs are so expensive in the US is because of government interference with the drug companies. http://time.com/money/4462919/prescription-drug-prices-too-high/ Government lobbying is also a huge issue which occurs throughout the system.

I know, thats why I was pointing out how its damaging. I wasnt saying it had happened in Canada, I was pointing out how the law can be abused and how laws like it have been abused all over the world, specially for punishing minority political groups.

https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/personal-income-tax-rate - List of tax rates http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11f0019m/11f0019m2015367-eng.htm - Education difference

Going to bring this one up specifically. Health care is literally ass here, and any Canadian will agree with you. Its overpriced, wait times are horrendous, and the hospitals suck. It can take months to get an MRI or a transplant with people waiting years for operations that would happen in days if you lived in the United States. The only reason the system there is so bad is because of interfering laws with insurance companies and the governments, driving prices up because the government is forcing them to pay so much. Ill also point out all those countries are severely in debt due to government overspending. Id also like to point out all those countries you mentioned have some of the highest taxes in the world, which is a huge burden on the taxpayer who could get better healthcare for cheaper in a free market. Education is also always better in privatized institutions which can be shown from the higher success rates of people coming out of private schools.

The vagueness is that any kind of "hurtful" thing directed towards someone can be classified as hate speech. If I lay out the facts for you and say something like (not saying its true just an example) "black people are statically less intelligent and more aggressive than other races" and someone gets hurt, you can still get charged, even though youre saying the truth based on facts. A society cant progress if facts and opinions of the majority oppress that of the minority, thats how things like Soviet Communism, and Nazism became so damaging to their respective countries. The Canadian constitution itself states that "Section 1 of the Charter says that Charter rights can be limited by other laws so long as those limits can be shown to be reasonable in a free and democratic society." This means the majority will always have a say over what the minority say because they are the ones who decide what is "reasonable" and why free speech needs to be absolute to protect the minority from repression by the majority.

The "prohibited grounds" include race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth. The crime of crimen injuria ("unlawfully, intentionally and seriously impairing the dignity of another") may also be used to prosecute hate speech In 2011, a South African court banned "Dubula iBhunu (Shoot the Boer)", a derogatory song degrading Afrikaners, on the basis that it violated a South African law prohibiting speech that demonstrates a clear intention to be hurtful, to incite harm, or to promote hatred Those are extremely vague