# The CanaDoper Café (2012 edition of The great, ongoing Canadian current events and politics thread.) **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [January 1, 2012, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014 "2012-01-01T03:31:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 58
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1141 "2012-05-16T23:04:23Z")
> [@Grey](#): > > Because in a stable democracy the government, being the sole legitimate users of force, must have a higher standard of need than…“maybe we’ll find something”. Why? If it is a stable democracy, then why don’t we trust the government to use the information wisely? We already trust them to the be sole legitimate users for force. A power that could easily lead to greater abuses than seeing what people are doing online. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1142 "2012-05-16T23:14:15Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > **Grey** , I’m usually onside with you, but not this time. I think the police deserve to have access to information to help catch and especially prevent child pornography, and other crimes. > > Giving police the power to be able to set up random check points has significantly reduced impaired driving. If giving the police power to investigate child pornography without a warrant results in anywhere near the same reduction in rates of child pornography then how can this not be a good thing? The problem with this is obvious; you’re conflating two things of enormously different degree. I mean, logically, we could also reduce illegal ownership of fully automatic weapons by simply eliminating all right to privacy in your own home and letting the police come in and search when and where they want, so why not do that, too? The answer, of course, is that the cost far outweighs the benefit. And in the case of child porn versus drunk driving, the costs and benefits just are not the same. The inconvenience and limitation on your rights in a drunk driving stop are very minimal, and to a large extent mitigated by the fact that 99.99% of the time you’re on the Queen’s roads anyway and by virtue of that fact have already voluntarily given up some of your privacy; conversely, the cost of drunk driving is measured in hundreds of lives per year. But to allow unfettered access to people’s computers or ISP records is a substantially greater invasion of privacy, and for what benefit? Child porn is gross, but let’s be honest, I don’t really care if your computer has gross stuff on it. How many children would actually be saved from serious injury or death? I’m guessing damned few - far fewer than drunk drivers kill every year, that’s for sure. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2012, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1143 "2012-05-16T23:51:51Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Why? If it is a stable democracy, then why don’t we trust the government to use the information wisely? We already trust them to the be sole legitimate users for force. A power that could easily lead to greater abuses than seeing what people are doing online. :dubious: The question was allowing the government to acquire information, not on executing on information already in their possession. ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 12:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1144 "2012-05-17T00:24:13Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > The problem with this is obvious; you’re conflating two things of enormously different degree. I mean, logically, we could also reduce illegal ownership of fully automatic weapons by simply eliminating all right to privacy in your own home and letting the police come in and search when and where they want, so why not do that, too? > > The answer, of course, is that the cost far outweighs the benefit. And in the case of child porn versus drunk driving, the costs and benefits just are not the same. The inconvenience and limitation on your rights in a drunk driving stop are very minimal, and to a large extent mitigated by the fact that 99.99% of the time you’re on the Queen’s roads anyway and by virtue of that fact have already voluntarily given up some of your privacy; conversely, the cost of drunk driving is measured in hundreds of lives per year. > > But to allow unfettered access to people’s computers or ISP records is a substantially greater invasion of privacy, and for what benefit? Child porn is gross, but let’s be honest, I don’t really care if your computer has gross stuff on it. How many children would actually be saved from serious injury or death? I’m guessing damned few - far fewer than drunk drivers kill every year, that’s for sure. Introducing laws that could reduce the proliferation of child pornography would ostensibly reduce who would be seeking that material. I’m thinking supply and demand economics here. I’m going to say something outlandish now. I’m not even sure I agree that viewing pixels on your computer screen, of acts that already happened, is necessarily a crime. But we need to deter this behaviour in order to shrink the market and protect children. Look, I’m not a “save the whales” kinda guy. But I’m a parent and infringements on freedoms, or access of information, that will help prevent this shit is a good idea. Especially if you have no reason to worry about the police looking into your ISP records. I see the other side of the coin, but personally I’m willing to agree to police searches of ISP records. I can’t see me changing my mind, but it’s a healthy debate. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1145 "2012-05-17T02:21:11Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > But to allow unfettered access to people’s computers or ISP records is a substantially greater invasion of privacy, and for what benefit? How is going onto the internet (anyone heard the term ‘information superhighway’?) any different than your road analogy? ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1146 "2012-05-17T02:52:29Z")
Because you can’t wave at the police cruiser when zooming onto the Google Turnpike. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1147 "2012-05-17T03:23:24Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > Introducing laws that could reduce the proliferation of child pornography would ostensibly reduce who would be seeking that material. I’m thinking supply and demand economics here. Yes, I suppose they could. If it interferes with my rights to unwarranted search of my things and invasion of my privacy, you’re going to have to make a much better case than “maybe it’ll reduce child porn.” Really? How? By how much? _In what way that you couldn’t do now by getting a warrant?_ > [@](#): > > Look, I’m not a “save the whales” kinda guy. But I’m a parent and infringements on freedoms, or access of information, that will help prevent this shit is a good idea. Especially if you have no reason to worry about the police looking into your ISP records. I’m a parent, and I disagree. My civil rights trump a bullshit claim of vague, undefined, maybe-we’ll-catch-some-child-porn benefits. I don’t think it’d do much good, and it could be used for harm, so thanks but no thanks. If YOU want the cops searching your stuff, invite them over. If they wanna search my stuff they can get a warrant. [QUOTE=Uzi] How is going onto the internet (anyone heard the term ‘information superhighway’?) any different than your road analogy? [/QUOTE] Does Her Majesty own Cogeco? ---
**Author:** ![Spoons](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spoons/32/3141_2.png) [@Spoons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spoons)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1148 "2012-05-17T04:15:48Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > Really? RIDE programs check hundreds, if not thousands of vehicles (without a warrant I might add) and only find a couple of offenders usually. I guess we should do away with that over-abuse of police power then. RIDE programs, and similar programs in other provinces, have been found to be constitutionally okay, and warrants are not required: [_R. v. Hufsky_, [1988] 1 S.C.R 621](http://scc.lexum.org/en/1988/1988scr1-621/1988scr1-621.pdf) (warning, PDF). ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1149 "2012-05-17T12:50:51Z")
Leaffan, here is a Globe and Mail [article](http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/case-highlights-undercover-world-of-catching-a-pedophile/article2434369/) about how it is done: [http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/case-highlights-undercover-world-of-catching-a-pedophile/article2434369/](http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/case-highlights-undercover-world-of-catching-a-pedophile/article2434369/) ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1150 "2012-05-17T13:36:30Z")
Thanks. It’s the same article I linked to in post 1129. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1151 "2012-05-17T14:02:32Z")
Sorry! ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1152 "2012-05-17T15:33:28Z")
[Federal study suggests relocating EI recipients to regions with labour needs.](http://ca.news.yahoo.com/federal-study-suggests-relocating-ei-recipients-regions-labour-080007055.html) What do you think? On the surface that doesn’t sound like a bad idea. ---
**Author:** ![mnemosyne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c4cdca/32.png) [@mnemosyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mnemosyne)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2012, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1153 "2012-05-17T16:03:33Z")
Providing support to people moving in order to get a job is a good thing; the cost of travelling to interviews or moving for work can be the backbreaker, so making that easier could help. But how many people are really free to move like that, just for work? How many EI recipients are able to just pack up and leave? What if they own a house (who do they sell it to, if everyone leaves their region to find work elsewhere?), have children, have pets (sure, you can move them, but maybe not easily)? What if it’s one spouse but not the other? It really isn’t all that easy to pack up and move to an entirely different region - for work or otherwise - and so while this idea might be part of a solution, I think finding ways to improve local economies also needs to be looked at. Basically, ‘nice idea, but give me data!’ ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1154 "2012-05-18T15:58:29Z")
Familiar with Canadian comedian Mike MacDonald? You’ll barely recognize him [now](http://www.ottawacitizen.com/News/Ottawa/Ailing%20comic%20Mike%20MacDonald%20issues%20public%20plea%20for%20a%20liver%20donor/6643704/story.html). He needs a liver. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1155 "2012-05-18T16:10:29Z")
> [@Cat\_Whisperer](#): > > [Federal study suggests relocating EI recipients to regions with labour needs.](http://ca.news.yahoo.com/federal-study-suggests-relocating-ei-recipients-regions-labour-080007055.html) What do you think? On the surface that doesn’t sound like a bad idea. This is one of those things that sounds great in theory but in practice would probably be far more trouble than it’s worth. People cannot just pack up and move a thousand miles like they’re UPS shipments, and if they could do so to get a job and were willing to do so they would have done it already. I mean, doesn’t everyone know someone who’s moved to find a job? It’s a free country; there is nothing stopping someone from doing this now. It’s one thing to ask someone “hey, if we paid your moving costs would you move to Saskatoon to take a job” but it’s quite something else to ask them to do it. Someone who lives in Fredricton with a good job offer in Saskatoon is either going to move there or they aren’t; there are very few people who whom the cost of moving would be a barrier to the financial benefits of being employed. Most people either A) Can scrape up the cost of a U-Haul, or B) Are unwilling or unable to move. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1156 "2012-05-18T16:50:55Z")
It would almost be better to put into place video conferencing infrastructure that would ease inter provincial interviews. No company is going to fund such a thing, the government puts into place infrastructure companies can exploit to find talent and job seekers have a 1 stop shop to get EI and a job. Likely cheaper than moving people cross country. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Whisperer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cat_whisperer/32/4839_2.png) [@Cat\_Whisperer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Whisperer)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1157 "2012-05-18T17:38:52Z")
> [@Grey](#): > > It would almost be better to put into place video conferencing infrastructure that would ease inter provincial interviews. No company is going to fund such a thing, the government puts into place infrastructure companies can exploit to find talent and job seekers have a 1 stop shop to get EI and a job. > > Likely cheaper than moving people cross country. Video conferencing for long-distance interviews is a great idea - I wonder if there could be some kind of arrangement made for EI offices to provide that service for employers and prospective employees. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1158 "2012-05-18T19:06:06Z")
Skype ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2012, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1159 "2012-05-18T20:14:36Z")
Exactly. All you need are centralized services (Job Centres) and the employer can dial in from home as it were. It would dramatically broaden employment opportunities - said with absolutely no data to back me up of course. ---
**Author:** ![mnemosyne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/c4cdca/32.png) [@mnemosyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mnemosyne)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2012, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014/1160 "2012-05-19T00:34:56Z")
Wait…what? You expect corporations and government to understand modern technology? They are just beginning to figure out email and finally got WinXP organized enough to use it without it crashing…too often. This new-fangled “Skype” thingy just won’t work. You’ll have competent candidates conducting interviews with a pair of breasts, the top of a bald guy’s head, the wall behind the monitor or the corner of the room where the spiderweb is because no one will understand what this “web-cam” thing is, and where to point it. Understandably, some people might not mind the pair of breasts situation, but the rest of it? Qualified candidates would go unhired because they laughed the whole time, and unqualified candidates would get hired in a heart beat because they are accidentally pointing the webcam at their dog’s ear. It would be a mess. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014.md?page=57) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-canadoper-cafe-2012-edition-of-the-great-ongoing-canadian-current-events-and-politics-thread/608014.md?page=59)