Liberals Flocking to Canada - CYA!

Fuck that! After seeing some of the nutjobs that own semi automatic weapons (for 'hunting' no less - which gives me fuck all faith in their marksmanship) you wouldn't need an opposing army to face them - they'd be more a danger to themselves.. And then seeing the opposition, the group that brought us the phrases 'friendly fire' and 'collateral damage'.. I'm at a loss who to be more scared of.

Fuck it, if it came to that I'd just shoot myself! That way I'd be assured that job would get done right, and only take ONE bullet.

Alternatively - Plan B:

I'll just go home to Australia and marry you all one at a time so you can sneak in the back door

Siggy.

whoa guys, this is a cool thread but once we get into talking about the violent overthrow of the government and shooting people that's kinda a free speech grey area. let's chill a lil bit.

Come and get me Secret Service...

I have a Seburo with GW's name on it.

- Ace

Death to Zuzi!

~Ulrika~

ok that's it. i'm joining your government and forming the Loud Neighbors Who Steal Your Beer Party (the LNWSTYBP).

please click here for more info

And leave the nutjobs in America with enough thermonuclear megatonnage to rip the crust off of Australia and send it spinning into space?

Fuck that!

Siggy, get subtle! If you invite Americans with assault weapons to party revolutionary and they end up killing themselves and everybody they let near them -- who will be left to vote Republican in the '08 elections?

Comes the Revolution then, Australia boy.

This is a good point

But as for blowing up Australia -- won't happen.. they love The Crocodile Hunter too much.. Besides we fly under the radar with that quaint 'shimp on the bar b' shit.

Mind you - we do export our most vile beer (fosters) over to you guys - so it's a wonder you haven't blown us up for that already.

Ah well, till then I'll stick with calling the White House once a week and playing 'bananaphone' over the line.

I figure if they all get that song stuck in their heads they won't have time to fuck things up

Siggy.

(Side Note: Yes - one of my co workers has the whitehouse on his speed dial, and every Wednesday at 5pm we play Bananaphone down the line)

oh heeeey, check it out we can apply as refugees! woot.

Although I'm a Brit, just bought a t shirt made by Minah Fredericks

front says: pigfucking moronic inbred losers for Bush (with nice picture of moron)

Back says: George Bush sure has a pretty mouth
That's why me, my sister, my cousin and my wife both voted for him

ha ha

I just bought it in Rose.

All Bush fans, you won't like it but go suck eggs.

If my moronic prime minister follows Bush into any more wars, I'll also be moving to Canada. See you all there.

Lat

I thought this article was interesting because it adds a different perspective on why people are leaving the US. If this continues the U.S. will eventually have a 1% business owner ship class and a 99% un-educated lower working class and nothing in between with exteremely limited growth. If people are also leaving the U.S. because they fear persecution from fanatical factions of the U.S. government, then this country is in very serious trouble indeed.

Reverse brain drain threatens U.S. economy
By Alan M. Webber

Until recently, if Americans heard the words "brain drain," they knew clearly what that meant: Bright, talented scientists, engineers and other techies from all over the world were migrating to the United States. They were drawn here by the world's best universities, the most dynamic companies, the freest economic and social environment and the highest standard of living.

Today, while many of these conditions still apply, Americans are starting to hear a new term: "reverse brain drain." What it suggests is the United States is pursuing government and private-sector policies that, over the long run, could lead to a significant shift in the world's balance of brainpower.

Recently, President Bush's chief economic adviser, Gregory Mankiw, touted the advantages for U.S. firms of outsourcing jobs overseas. But that trend, if left unattended, could have serious implications for this country's economic competitiveness.

For its part, the federal government seems intent on letting "controversial" scientists — for example, those dealing with research that touches on the issue of abortion — go to other countries and keeping foreign talent out. U.S. companies are happy to outsource knowledge work while, at the same time, buying out the contracts of their most experienced workers — all in the name of reducing costs. And the one sure way to grow new brains — a high-quality educational system — has failed to produce enough homegrown talent.

As the economy globalizes, and as first-class creative minds go abroad, stay abroad or are produced abroad, other nations may challenge the United States' role as the leader in innovation and creativity. The prospect of that challenge tomorrow — more than the loss of jobs today — is what the debate over America's economic future ought to be about.

First, recent government policies are sending talented U.S.-based researchers overseas and clamping down on the arrival of new researchers to this country. A recent article by Carnegie Mellon professor Richard Florida in The Washington Monthly magazine makes a persuasive case that the Bush administration's policies are shooting this country's economy in the, well, the brain. Florida's book, The Rise of the Creative Class, demonstrates that the most competitive communities are those that have the highest concentration of talented individuals, a high degree of technological innovation and a high level of tolerance for diverse lifestyles.

But, Florida says, the United States is losing its edge in these categories.

He cites the case of Roger Pederson, one of the leaders in stem-cell research, who left his job at the University of California to pursue research in the United Kingdom. Why? The British government recruited him at the same time the Bush administration was clamping down on stem-cell research. Losses such as Pederson's aren't being filled by enough new arrivals. Talented foreigners aren't coming here, sometimes because we aren't letting them in. A National Science Board study found that U.S. visas for immigrants to work in science and technology dropped by 55% from 2001 to 2002, largely because of the post-9/11 clampdown.

Second, American firms are contributing aggressively to the reverse brain drain. For decades, they shifted blue-collar manufacturing jobs to parts of the world with low labor costs and acceptable quality standards. Now, they are outsourcing knowledge work — engineering, software, product design and development — to such countries as China, India and Russia. Intel CEO Craig Barrett has warned that Russia, China and India already have as many as 250 million to 500 million knowledge workers — the kind of highly educated, technologically skilled employees who can write computer code, design sophisticated products and manage high-end production processes.

Companies that contract with these foreign workers are, in effect, outsourcing their brains. In the short term, they may save money and boost profits. In the longer run, they outsource creativity and, gradually, erode their capacity to generate new products and services.

At the same time, U.S. companies are offering early retirement or attractive buyout opportunities to their most experienced, most knowledgeable and most expensive workers, in the name of economic savings. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the percentage of Americans ages 55-64 who are gainfully employed continues to drop from mid-1960s highs. The thinking behind this strategy is the same as for sending knowledge work overseas: find newer, often younger, replacement workers at lower cost.

It's a fool's bargain. Foreign or younger workers cannot replace what the older workers contribute in the way of institutional memory, long-term relationships and applied creativity. The company loses both the knowledge capital and social capital that come with long-term, smart, high-performing workers.

Finally, the problem of a reverse brain drain is exacerbated by the continuing crisis in American education. A recent column by Nicholas Kristof in The New York Times makes the point that U.S. education simply is doing a lousy job in math and science. The most recent international ranking of eighth-graders from around the world in math and science put the United States 19th, just after Latvia. India and China were not included in that trends survey — but it's a safe bet that if they had been, the U.S. would have slid to 21st.

Why does this matter? Consider Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's testimony this month before the Senate Banking Committee. When asked about outsourcing and the rising U.S. trade deficit, Greenspan sagely commented that education, not trade or outsourcing, would determine the fate of U.S. workers.

No one disputes the fact that, when it comes to economic dynamism, the United States still ranks at the top. But the combination of these "reverse brain drain" policies presents a clear danger to America's future competitiveness.

The long-term trends in the world economy are clear: We are shifting inexorably toward a knowledge economy, where productive, well-paid work is based on ideas, information and adaptive thinking. Work involves more intangibles (brains) and fewer tangibles (muscles). The country and the companies with the best brains will win.

The only way for the United States to out-think, outsmart and out-innovate the competition, is to look hard at government policies that either send our best brains overseas or discourage more brains from coming here; to question business practices that increase reliance on foreign brains while "buying out" our own; and to demand more from our education system. It's not too late to stanch the reverse brain drain. But first we have to put our own brains to work on the problem.

Alan M. Webber is founding editor of the business magazine Fast Company and a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors.

Screw it! I'm going to Canada....this Spring....for my vacation. Yeppers, gunna eat me lotza Pierogies, drink some real Molson, hang out at my cottage...I loves me some Canada. Dunno if I'd relocate, I lived there once and the exchange rate killed me.

for more info go here:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/refugees/resettle-1.html

and here

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/refugees/resettle-2.html

Cheers!
Arti

Kerry isn't that cool , I voted for him but like most of the people who did, it was more to get bush out.

As for fleeing the country, are there actually people doing this? I though they were kidding. Who would pull up roots because someone they don't like will be around for 4 more years max?

Because the Supreme Court justices he'll appoint will serve for life. Then let's see who gets to complain about "activist judges"

seems like overreacting to leave your country and heritage behind cause you don't like the president and his politics. after going to all the trouble of becoming a canadian citizen or whatever are they going to move somewhere else if a prime minister they don't like comes along?

if you leave a country cause you don't like the politicians you're going to run out of countries real quick.

Never have I read truer words...stop the cycle of abuse people!!

Frankly, we made a big mistake fighting and winning the last civil war. we should have let them leave, waited two years, invaded, freed everyone who needed freeing, left a puppet government (sorta like Iraq, eh?) and left them as a separate country. Bush could have been president of "a whole nuther country" and we could have a progressive government here in the real America.

Another mistaken war by another Republican.

I'm not leaving the US. I have plenty of reasons. Besides, I have relatives up north, and I happen to think Toronto is the best American city there is. But I'm not leaving. And when the cops come to administer the mandatory Loyalty Oaths, I'll rely on my Second Amendment Rights just as I rely on my First Amendment Rights now.

I happen to be just as well trained in those skills as I am in these

And, then, I can show you the difference between a liberal and a leftist

Bring it on, weasel.

"I'm pissed and clever and I have 55 million friends."

Well, first. I am happy and I have 2 really good friends... not 55 million grunion who you claim as friends. Speaking of which, how many of those will be here four years from now? Hopefully less than 50 million... more of the US for me!

As for "another mistaken war...."
Let's see.. WWI... Wilson.. Democrat
WWII - FDR... Democrat
Korea - Democrat
Vietnam - under 500 advisors sent by Ike, huge increase by JFK & LBJ... Nixon ended the war by ordering the pullout - a campaigh pledge kept... so... Republicans didn't get us in, the Dems did.. and Republicans did get us out...
Iraq - Bush..okay.. got me there.
Iraq 2 - Bush 2.. got me again.. whoopee!

So.. tally up? 2 World Wars, Korea and Vietnam - Dems
2 Iraqs - Republicans...

Hmm.. seems to me that the Republicans are gettting a bad rap here.

I didn't know weasels could type.. I do know that skunks and trolls can... as evidenced by the stink of some posts in this thread.

And if memory serves corrently, a certain captain knocked a certain admiral out of the sky....hmmm.. anyone?

i don't frown about migration. nations are essentially social contracts between those that are defined interior to its sovereignty. if you are unhappy with the social contract, why not go somewhere where there is one that you like if that place will welcome you?

many people leave despotic regimes, or war torn nations to find a better life in north america. it is no different for the liberal beatnicks to move up here for a better life. i have friends who are very right leaning and many have moved to the states and some are considering it. i say good for them!

in a global economy and network society, geographic borders on political maps are becoming less and less meaningful in defining who we are as individuals.

korg, i think you are trivializing the historical context of all of these wars.

all of the wars you mention, to my best knowledge, were started by another country against american allies. america entered world war 2 late and only because it was forced to in self defense against an unprovoked japanese attack.

nobody contests the righteousness of the liberation of kuwait or the dismantling of the taliban.

it is this one war, in iraq, unprovoked, and unsubstantiated that people are contesting.

and this statement is not trivializing anything?
<<Another mistaken war by another Republican. >>

One word.... horsemanure (the PG version)

I actually contest the righteousness of the invasionof Kuwait... and of Iraq.... so there. We shouldn't have gone in either time.. want me to repeat it? We shouldn't have gone in either time. But we did go in, we are there now. We need to deal with THAT, not rhetoric about why we are there now - which is a pointless discussion.

This is not about that....my post that is. My post is about the continued harping by people about things that will not change and cannot be changed. We ARE in Iraq... we will be there for a while... We will not be out of Iraq until at least two more years according to many more informed people than I. Why keep focusing on the "Republican who got us into this"? It's done. Move on. Nothing said here will change a damn thing about what is happening politically - not one thing.

Oh, and factually, you are incorrect - at least partially. We entered both World Wars BECAUSE Democratic Presidents had foreign policies in place which essentially decided that we would get involved. Up until Wilson acted, it was a toss up which side we would enter on, if we entered at all. Roosevelt, having been in office for 9 years already, had formed US foreign policy for so long that - even had Japan not attacked the US - it was foreseeable that we would enter the European theater of operations in 1942 anyway. AS for the Korean war, Roosevelt crafted the UN before his death. Truman executed it and supported our entry/action on the Korean peninsula. These were all Democratic party foreign policy initiatives - not Republican ones. So, the count still stands as I called it.

So I guess this is 'catch up' ?

Dunno how much of an effect political party of the president has on the likelyhood of going to war, really. I think it's more dependent on the individual. Clinton went ahead with little minor and humanitarian (that I can recall, although you could argue this in Bush wars too) operations here and there, Bush has a more aggressive, visionary, and risky approach.

So are the Reps caught up yet?

"Withdrawl in disgust is not the same as apathy."
-Richard Linklater

An election is not a fight, Aaron. When it breaks down as such someting has gone very very wrong. Considering Bush's fearmongering since 9/11 and through his campaign, I'd say it's ironic that you call these people "crybabies" just because they feel that Bush is a threat to their wellbeing.

If there was a forest fire behind my home, I tried to put it out, and failed, I'd evacuate my home.