- May 16, 2013 - 09:59
How any one can predict and make predictions on hand outs about healthy individuals and what party they vote for and that can assume by reading an article and comments with out proof can certainly tell you some thing about the writer of the comment????
- May 12, 2013 - 08:20
I guess businesses are now entitled to the same benefits as the banks, being that they are businesses as well, since the federal government bailed out some banks to the tune of $114 million. I'm not sure if that was a loan, but the precedence was established. I have never understood how banks with depositors - selling stocks, charging depositors for all sorts of services giving nothing back - needed a bail out at all. They lost their depositor's money? So now businesses can access taxpayers as well. The only ones not sucking at the trough are the ones paying into it. Soon there will be no straw to make the bricks either, with jobs farmed out abroad, and laying off people in the necessary services here.
- May 11, 2013 - 23:21
Wangersky says that by doing research and development for the benefit of businesses, "All we're doing is making them fat and lazy." That may be true. But if so, the same principle must apply to ACOA grants. Would Wangersky do away with ACOA too? And what about welfare for individual citizens, as well as EI? Don't those things make Canadians "fat and lazy?" Would Wangersky do away with those things as well? I suspect not, based on the socialist bent in his past writings. But logical consistency has never been a hallmark of lefty ideologues like Wangersky.
- Tony Rockel
- May 11, 2013 - 23:19
Great editorial and timely, too. In 1895 Wilhelm Roentgen didn't say to himself "today I'm going to look for a way to see through solid objects". Instead he was curious about what happened when a high voltage electric current was passed through an evacuated glass tube. Totally by accident he discovered a mysterious form of radiation coming from one end of the tube. This radiation could pass through solid objects and form images on photographic film. Roentgen called this radiation "X-rays". There's no way he could even have known where to start if some bureaucrat had told him he needed to develop an X-ray machine. Nobody at that time even dreamed that such a thing was possible. The same argument applies to the development of the laser and countless other discoveries. These are dark days for innovation and free scientific inquiry.
- May 11, 2013 - 17:23
harper is an absolute idiot !!! maybe this idiot can hitch a one way trip to mars. this is one way we can get rid of this pathetic fool !!!
- May 11, 2013 - 11:07
Such an interesting article about some one that tried to make a difference in scientific ways he left natural of nature and got involved in the theoretical life of bussiness and when you do not have the knowledge in bussiness and not saying he did not know what he was doing but he done it and reading he is not the only one,it is like trying to do some thing that was already done???? to spend money to make money,was it some thing like what your friend that was flushed that had done????working for the government???? and what were you saying about the cookie jar,more than the cookie jar needs to be closed. Good article it looks like the cookie jar dropped and there is nothing but a mess and do not seem like anybody knows how to clean the mess only when it comes to themselves and some one they need to do it for them????
- Christopher Chafe
- May 11, 2013 - 08:23
You have no problem in blasting governments for giving "handouts" to corporations, but I have to wonder do you share the same feeling about government giving "handouts" to healthy individuals who refuse to go to work. I would assume probably not as you are a supporter of the NDP party.
- May 11, 2013 - 16:39
So the unemployed are unemployed because they refuse to go to work? Pretty simple logic. Good thing you'll never be unemployed.
- May 11, 2013 - 20:47
It appears the 2nd comment has little to do with science and it presumes that handouts to corporations are good..For Who? certainly not the scientists or the people who pay the bills only good for those who sit complacently by and watch this country turn into a fascist state where if it isn't good for the company and the CPC cant be good .
- Tony Rockel
- May 11, 2013 - 22:38
1) Corporations don't need any more handouts than they're already getting. 2) You conjure up a picture of hordes of "healthy" people unwilling to work, which is part of the usual mean-spirited "let's demonize the poor because it's all their fault" rhetoric, when in fact the cost of supporting a small minority of layabouts is minuscule compared to the corporate sponging and Wall Street plunder that goes on 24/7 without a whisper of complaint from types like you.