Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Quebec Gripped by Contagious Entitlement Disease

Imagine your parents reduce your weekly teenage allowance, claiming that economic circumstances make it impossible to keep up the generous payments.

How would you react?

If you are a Quebec student, you might tell your parents that such a proposal is unacceptable and that under no circumstances will you allow the decision to stand.

You tell them that until they go back on their decision, you're not going to attend school.
They remind you that your reduced allowance is still higher than the national average and is exceedingly fair considering the family's financial position.
You shake your head. You don't care to listen or understand. You tell your parents that they must give you back your allowance, or else. 

Your parents love you, but understand that they can't give in just because you think that their decision is unfair and inconvenient.
Just the same, after a few weeks of whining, they say they'll make some compromises, maintaining the lower allowance, but increasing your clothing allowance.

You refuse their offer, demanding nothing less than a complete reversal.

After a couple more weeks, during which time your parents resign themselves to your 'school strike,' you decide that you need to up the ante to get their attention.
To make the point that you must be taken seriously, you decide to destroy family property and start by breaking a bay window in the living room, with warnings that unless your parents negotiate a return of your allowance, more destruction is to follow.

When your mom leaves for work the next morning, you threaten her by blocking the car door, reminding her that the only way to have peace return to the family, is to give in to your teenage demands.
Your parents are saddened at what you've become, but stand firm and continue to encourage you to go back to school. 

In a brilliant flash, you come up with some ideas as to how your parents can trim the family budget and create some savings which can be used to subsidize your allowance.
Your parents listen dutifully, while you lecture them about foolish family spending which includes, according to you, wasted dollars on items like fast food and vacations.

Your parents agree to sit down together with you and look at those expenses with an eye to trimming the fat. They assure you that if there are reasonable savings to be had, the savings would be put towards restoring your allowance.

You agree, shake hands on the deal and even write out and sign an agreement whereby you agree to return to school.

But two days later you renege, claiming that you were fooled and were taken advantage of at the negotiating table and demand once again that your parents return your allowance.

Now in a rage at their refusal, you decide to up the ante even higher, deciding to make life so uncomfortable for your parents, that they'll have to give in.

You tell your dad that you are going to disrupt him from holding the annual garage sale that he uses to bring in a few extra bucks for the family.


You tell your uncle and aunt that you are coming over to their house to break a few windows, so that they will pressure your parents to give in.

You throw a smoke bomb in the Metro to perturb those who have nothing to do with your fight, in an attempt to make them so uncomfortable that they will also influence your parents to give you what you want.

You tell your little sister (who has accepted the reduced allowance) that as long as you aren't getting your full allowance, you're going to physically stop her from attending school.

You tell your grandma that you're going to stop her from attending church and delay her from going to the hospital for a necessary treatment.

The police come over and warn you that your behavior is illegal and that it can land you in jail, leaving you with a criminal record that will follow you the rest of your life.

No matter, you tell the cops, my allowance is more important!

The school phones home and tells your parents that you're in danger of losing your semester, but you remind everyone that the principle of restoring your allowance is more important than any lost school year.

When your parents ask you if all this fuss is really worth it, you become even more frustrated and angry and tell them that you are fighting for all the teenagers who risk getting their allowance cut.

Your parents have had enough, they drag you to the shrink to see if you are unbalanced, considering the self-destructive nature of your behavior.

The shrink doesn't take long to diagnose the problem. He determines that you are suffering an acute case of Entitleitis.

"What the Hell is  Entitleitis?" your parents ask.

"It's a condition whereby individuals believe that their personal interests are more important than society's
Those affected lose all sense of proportion and will do anything to get what they want, including resorting to violence and intimidation, even with loved ones. They become hyper greedy and selfish and believe society owes them a living.
It's quite a dangerous condition 

"Never heard of it" says your father."Is that something new?"

"Not really, it occurs in societies that overindulge their citizens with too many freebies, to the point that they believe that the world serves only them.
Quebec seems to be in the mid stage of an epidemic and if the disease is left unchecked, it's likely we'll turn out like Greece, where the people are economically decimated by its consequences.

"Where did he catch it, asks a bewildered mother?

"Generally," answers the doctor, "they catch it at school. Some are pretty badly infected. Where is he a student, by the way?"


"Oh dear," replies the doctor," Then there's no hope, that school is infected with the most virulent strain. Your son is a goner"

Now readers, you may think the above attack on students is a burlesque and exaggerated.
I don't think so.
I believe that the condition of Entitleitis is real and represents the most destructive social problem facing Quebec.

The condition is not as rampant as in Greece, there still remains students who work hard, study hard and are determined to succeed in life on their own merit.
You will find them in the engineering faculties, the law and medical schools. You'll also find them in the trade schools that teach basic and unsexy skills that translate into productive jobs.

When I disparage schools like UQAM, I do so in dead earnest.
One reader has mentioned that in his hiring capacity, he sends all CV's from UQAM directly to the shredder. Funny but too true.

I hate to admit it, but I too suffered from this prejudice as a boss, when I did interviews for senior positions.
There were only two deal-breakers that would disqualify anyone from employment at my company, a degree from UQAM and a decent golf handicap.

Here's what students at UQAM are exposed to on a daily basis, left-wing separatist professors who believe that capitalism, democracy and Canada  are all evil concepts.
They teach students that exploiting natural resources is evil, but accepting handouts from provinces that do exploit natural resources is fair.
They teach students that the rich can pay for everything and that confiscatory taxation is fair.
They teach the fantasy that society can create more benefits without increasing productivity. They spend more time dreaming up schemes to collect more tax than to they do actually thinking how to create more wealth.

Here's a tasty example from Pierre-Yves Guay - Ph.D. Sociologue du développement économique ; Professer at the École des Sciences de la gestion, at of course, UQAM.
"And why not a sales surtax applicable to products of conspicuous consumption, such as cars over $45,000, pleasure boats costing more than $30,000, motorcycles more than $20,000posh jewelry, domestic appliances, full of useless options, Monster homes, second homes of more than $400,000, and upscale clothing, unaffordable for most, etc..

How about a
surtax on products that should curb consumption because they destroy public health and the environment, while there are alternatives! Place mores taxes on tobacco, junk food, gambling, etc.. Let the state increase the price of alcohol and lottery tickets and casino operations that we sell!"
  (Thanks to Troy for the link)
That's what he's teaching your kids.

First it is the standard socialist claptrap that nobody deserves to be rich or in this case upper-middle class.
Quebec Entitleists have long ago lowered the barrier,  someone who is considered upper middle class anywhere else in North America, is classified as being rich in Quebec.

But the professor does much more than attack the rich upper middle class, he wants to impose his own lifestyle upon them.
People who don't fit in with his view of life should be taxed for that fact.
If you drink wine with your meal, you should be taxed extra, if you have coffee you shouldn't.
If you use bike paths, it should be free, if you buy yourself a piece of jewelery it should be taxed exorbitantly.
If you play soccer, the use of the city's park and recreation should be free, but if you go to the casino, you should be taxed even higher.
If you work hard and make lots of money, much of it should be confiscated. If you choose not to work hard, you should be compensated by those who work.

The sad part about all these proposed 'lifestyle' taxes or 'sin taxes' as the Entitleists like to call them, is that Quebec already imposes upon them, the highest level of taxation in North America.

By the way taxes on things like alcohol and lotto tickets is regressive, poor people pay the same rate as rich people. Oh well!

UQAM is chock full of professors like Mr. Guay, he is the rule, not the exception.

Graduating UQAM with entitleist professors like Mr. Guay turns you into you a mindless robot with your hands permanently outstretched for freebies and entitlements

Is there any cure for Entitleism?

Just a strong will to resist and say NO! to their demands, no matter how painful or how long it takes.

Here's a video of Margret Thatcher showing what true leadership is.
Can it happen in Quebec ....NEVER!


  1. Editor,

    Just to make my mark as the first comment, seeing that it is yet another premature posting.

  2. Oh shucks! Missed the premature posting again! Anyway, this is one of the few times I've ticked a box. Loved it! Excellent analogy.

    Another reason why I support Quebec's separation more than ever. These antidemocratic thugs seem to be controlling the agenda. Nothing is being done to put it to an end. Margaret Thatcher in that YouTube segment was absolutely correct in stating unequivocally she will not negotiate with those who exercise coersion. Too bad Premier John James "Goldilocks" Charest doesn't have the same sense Maggie did. They'll bankrupt Quebec, but I hope the ROC will not tolerate supporting Quebec's sinking ship, and I'll fight with every last ounce of my strength to see Quebec gets exactly what it deserves!

    I wonder too how EI recipients in Quebec are going to react to the Conservatives' latest policy on taking any job for money, or having to relocate to do so. A Chicoutimian having to relocate to Fort McMurry to take strenuous, dirty work in the oil sands? LOL! A Sept-Ilian having to work along side the Filipinos at Mickey D's?LOLL!

    Oh, and about Premier John James "Goldilocks" Charest's Minister of Education's resignation from politics? BIG DEAL! Perhaps the strain has been getting to her, but she has put in 15 years in the National Assembly, so she'll get the maximum pension, and it takes 15 years in office to do it. 75% of her cabinet salary + COLA increases? Great! She can sit on her ass the rest of her live and still take in far more than the average wage in Canada, and far, far more than the average wage in Quebec.

    As far as I'm concerned, the way I look at Quebec's tax brackets, you earn over $30,000 per year in Quebec, and you're taxed like a rich person! That's less than 2/3 the average industrial wage of Canada!

    So, one Minister of Education riding off into the sunset on a pony with a big satchel of money in hand. Who's next? Premier John James "Goldilocks" Charest? Just as well. He's coming up on 15 years in the Assembly, and as the Editor previously mentioned, he'll pretty much be riding on a poney into the sunset with TWO satchels, one in one had with his federal cabinet minister's pension for his 14 years in Ottawa, and an even better deal than the recently resigned Minister of Education with the premier's succulent pension! 75% of his last Quebec salary + about 70% of his Ottawa salary (he'll turn 55 next year, so whooptie-doo--COLA kicks in!). Within a few years, he'll be making double his working salary if he simply chooses to sit on his ass the rest of his life. Oh, but of course, he become a key not speaker, maybe do to political analysis on TV, maybe get a senate position in Ottawa, or some cushie other patronage appointment as an ambassador in Quebec house somewhere in the world, or even his name on the letterhead of some high-profile law firm (Heenan Blaikie, maybe?) Whatever! He's set for life on Easy Street. Who says you can't get rich in politics? Maybe these kids are setting for a cinchy political career, so maybe they're smarter than we think.

    Like David Dingwall said as a cabinet minister when the Liberals were last in power: "I'm entitled to my entitlements!" Charest will sure be getting his!!!

    1. Unfortunately, you are correct. The Quebec political class feeds at the public trough while the suckers support Quebec independence

  3. Great post. A synonym for 'Entitleitis' is 'laziness'. Why work hard for what you achieve in life if you don't have to, right?

    1. Martha, you hit the nail right on the head. This is the problem with a wefare state (and Quebec wrote the book on the welfare state). On the positive side, there are programs to help the working poor, and I'm for that. At least it creates an incentive to work, even on a modest wage. I know a single mother in Quebec who got next to NO support from her ex-husband (and barely any during the marriage, at that), and she qualified for PWA (Parental Wage Assistance, a program available only to modest wage earners), family allowance, LOGIRENTE (a program that supplements one's rent, up to $80 per month) and the subsidized daycare. At least she went out there and worked her heart out, often 12-hour shifts.

      On the other hand, there are those, who on welfare and at home all the time, can send their kids to the subsidized daycare, get LOGIRENTE, and several tax goodies like RIF (Real Estate Tax Refund). Rich people, too, can take advantage of the subsidized daycare. RIDICULOUS! OUTRAGEOUS! FOOLISH! When lazy-assed welfare recipients can take advantage of subsidized daycares, that's sick! One in particular I know of also owns a car. OWNS A CAR YET? My guess is she works under the table, or she's whoring during the day. Sadly there are advantagetakers in a welfare state, and it only takes a few bad apples to spoil it for those who genuinely need the help.

    2. I understand what you are saying. I was born and raised in Quebec, and lived there up until 2009, so I do know the province very well personally. I am all for helping, and for making education fairly accessible to everyone, so that everyone can have a chance to move forward and create a better life. I have a daughter who has remained in Montreal and is a student at McGill University, and I am so happy that she's given a chance at higher education. But there has to be some price to pay that is reasonable so that students who are serious will proceed instead of having kids becoming 'career' students; spending years in school doing nothing, going nowhere because they have no need to since everything is already bought and paid for. If there is no incentive to work at something, if everything is handed out and nothing is gained with some honest effort, who in their right mind is going to willingly work hard for it? Why on earth would they bother?

    3. Martha, on the one hand, I'd like to think that after so much time in U dicking around, the U will let the drifters know they either must finish up for their degree to make way for upcoming new students, or leave without a degree, or take night classes only. That's not likely because the U's get money for having a body in place.

      When I went to Concordia, many years ago (I too was born and raised in Montreal), there were students on campus who had no place being there, except the universities got government money just to have bodies there. At least Concordia had some stringency to their programs where if your performance was poor enough, they'd probably ask them to leave, or expel them to make way for newcomers. I don't think, though, it was a strict policy.

      Quebec is not known for Ivy League universities! UQAM as Animal House, maybe? The whole UQ network as Animal House?

  4. Editor,

    Let us see your analogy about the spoiled kid. Even your analogy reflects that there is something wrong in Quebec society. You see, I was not born and raised in Canada. Back where I am from, if I pulled something half as crazy as the kid in your story, my parents would have kicked me out of their home. Really. Even if parents would not kick their children out, they would make sure that the kid would behave. As long as the kid is under the parents' roof, he would do what the parents tell him to do.

    Not so in Quebec. Parents can not even discipline their children sternly. Granted, there is a line between a strict discipline and child abuse and sometimes the line gets so thin some parents cross it without realizing. But I think blanket protection given to children tends to make children here feel that he can do what he wants with impunity.

    1. Troy, ANY parents with a lick of sense would do what your parents would have done had you acted up, Quebec or no Quebec. I reiterate though, I'm talking about parents with a lick of sense. Quebec society, for the most part, makes ZERO sense! To think there is a university in several Quebec locations that plants the seeds of ignorance into the minds of young adults (the UQs), the brain-dead leading the brain-dead.

      As long as Quebec's leadership is going to be shit-for-brains like Pauline Marois, and someone as spineless and gonadless as Premier John James "Goldilocks" Charest, well, then what do you expect? You had Bourassa that ran like a puppy dog between his legs and needed Trueau to invoke the War Measures Act, and Duplessis who was out for whatever he could muster with assistance from his goon squad, the SQ! One spineless leader after another after another after another...

  5. On a separate note, I am rather glad to see that the police forces start to show some spine against those who are in violation of the laws. Not as tough as I would like, but it is a start. Otherwise, this government will surely go down in history as a limp-dick government. More than just losing a semester or spending money in fines or time in jail, I hope that the rap sheets will now follow those breaking the law for the rest of their still long lives.

    However, going to, and reading comments like this and this I just wonder in what universe do they live that the society must tolerate those who commit criminal activities.

  6. Les Québécois (pro-boycott ones anyways) truly live in a bubble, and make no mistake, with virtually 100% of English educational institutions chugging along a full steam, this is a decidedly Francophone affair. This is what happens when you live in isolation. With zero connections outside Quebec, they have shown the World just how foolish and bizarre this place has become. It would seem the pendulum has swung too far in one direction here. They are not fighting a noble cause like the struggle for democracy or free speech, no they are fighting for the right to have one's cake and eat it too. With the lowest tuition rates in North America ( after the fee hike), they have zero support outside of Quebec and have a lot of people around the World scratching their heads wondering what exactly the problem is? How bad has it become? Parents of boycotting students were actually blocking non-boycotting students in Ste Therese from trying to get into their CEGEP (so they could finish their semester on time and be accepted into University). How can anyone justify such madness? These people need a serious reality check.

    1. René: Can you please substantiate this story? With all due respect, I find it hard to believe that parents would be preventing kids other than their own from attending CEGEP. It would be insanity, and while I CAN believe there is enough bizarre behaviour for this sort of thing to happen in Quebec, I'd need to see the source of this phenomenon to truly believe it.

    2. CBC news, May 15th 2012. Quebec College to remain closed after tense standoff.


    3. Mississauga,

      This is the story. Some teachers and parents of those who did the blockage supported the blockage.


  7. Troy has a point. I had four children who all worked during their post secondary education...(waiting tables, construction etc) The rule in our house was, either you go to school or find another roof to put over your head.(read get a job). Seemed to work out well as they all graduated with "professional" degrees and are either gainfully employed or operating their own businesses. Lethargy is a slow thing as it is usually overtaken by poverty.

    What can one expect in the nanny state of Quebec? In reality the students inherited their condition of "entitleitus" from their parents, who became afflicted with the condition due to excessive and expensive social programs offered by the government and in large part paid for by Ottawa and the ROC. These programs have also resulted in close to a 248 billion dollar debt, which Quebec will have to address in short order. Will be interesting what the people will do when their programs due to economic conditions are slashed and burned to reduce the burden of debt. This in a province whose population is rapidly ageing and will require more health care and other services going forward. To sum it up the future of Quebec does not look all that bright.

    The other issue is that the student strike has illuminated the largesse of the social programs in Quebec as compared to other regions of Canada. This will not bode well for Quebec, when the equalization formulaes are reviewed in 2014. "what, you want us to pick up the tab for your social programs that we don't enjoy ourselves"

    1. Scarily, what the autocratic Conservatives will do depends on where the Conservatives will stand in the polls on Equalization Formula Amendment Day. If the NDP's support stays as strong as it is now, or stronger, the Conservatives will be scurrying for every last vote they can get, even in Quebec. I personally don't see Quebec's fortunes for the Conservatives improving for sometime to come, if ever, but politics makes for strange bedfellows, so who knows what will manifest between now and that day in 2014 when the formula will be amended...or not.

      I am wholeheartedly in favour of cutting Quebec's equalization transfers to the quick because they're a backward society that is capable of doing MUCH better
      (1) if they try


      (2) if necessity is the mother of invention, i.e., their equalization payments are
      cut to the quick and their choices are to prosper through hard work and


      (3) twiddle their thumbs and tailspin into Greek style with austere economic
      measures and share the little bit of nothing that will be left to thinly spread
      around. They'll either be able to eat or pay rent, but not both!

      Considering how Quebec operates, I wouldn't be surprised if alternative #3 took place, but that would be a colossal disappointment.

    2. Harper already tried to outright blatantly buy Quebec votes with his Quebec-only slogan "Our region to power". That's pretty much as badly as anyone can pander to votes, and they shot him down famously. I doubt they'll change their mind in 3 years.

    3. Thank you all. I'm nauseated now!

  8. Le monde se divise présentement de façon marquée entre la gauche et la droite et le canada n'échappe pas à cette nouvelle réalité.Mr.Drunk,vous devriez sortir un peu plus souvent de votre ghetto.

    1. You should learn to pick your battles. A modest tuition raise for 4 years of a person's lifetime is not a Right Vs Left issue. If you think it is, please explain.

    2. Anonymous, you are always good for a laugh. Fortunately for the ROC the left wing is rapidly declining.

    3. Nous en reparlerons en 2014 :)

    4. NDP in the lead in the latest polls, Johan.

  9. "I will never negotiate with people who use coercion and violence to achieve their objective" - M.Thatcher

    When she was busting unions in her own country, she backed Solidarity, a trade union in Poland, that used violence and coercion to achieve its objectives.

    Her government continued to back Saddam Hussein all the way until August 6 1990. She refused to withdraw her support for Hussein's regime even as he was gassing Kurds in 1988.

    Her son was an international arms dealer, selling guns to the worst human rights violators in Africa.

    Her government used violence and coercion all around the world when it suited its interested, including the bombing of Iraq in 1991 and the sanctions that amounted to genocide (and infanticide), in the words of Denis Halliday (the United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator in Iraq) and Hans von Sponeck (a UN Assistant Secretary-General and UN Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq).

    Yet here she is, talking about the "enemies of democracy". A five star hypocrite.

    1. Thanks for succinctly putting it, adski. I find Tatcher quite repulsive myself, and anything she endorses is seriously questionable.

    2. The bombing of Iraq was pursuant to UN authorization.

    3. With the US bullying UN member states to vote for, under a threat that US aid will be withdrawn. One middle east country broke out (I think it was Qatar), James Baker approached their UN rep and said "you'll see now". Totally childish bullying.

      Another interesting development was how that war was sold at home. With the majority of Americans against, a PR firm Hill and Knowlton was hired to engineer support. One of their stunts was to present to the world a girl who allegedly witnessed Iraqi soldiers throwing babies out from incubators in a Kuwaiti hospital. That highly televised story single-handedly swung the popular option from against to for the war.

      As it turned out, the story was made up, and the girl who pitched the story in front of Congress (under an assumed name Nayirah and curiously speaking in perfect American English) later turned out to be the daughter of Kuwaiti ambassador in Washington.

      The genocidal sanctions that followed were supported mainly by the US and UK, the long time players in the region and major exploiters of middle eastern and Iraqi oil.

    4. One comment about the YouTube link above. The presenter is wrong (and dishonest, is he working for CBC?) at 1:24 when he implies that the CBC 5th Estate broke the Nayirah story. The 5th Estate did a piece on it later on, but the deception was uncovered by an American journalist John MacArthur who worked for Harper's Magazine, and had this story re-printed in the New York Times.

      Here's a more accurate reading on the Nayirah ploy:

      John MacArthur went on to write an excellent book "Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the 1991 Gulf War",+iraq&hl=en&sa=X&ei=LRe1T-nkFOqf6AGy7eDzDw&ved=0CDYQuwUwAA#v=onepage&q=macarthur%2C%20iraq&f=false

    5. You just quoted some jokester from the UN and now you criticize the UN. You can't have it both ways.

    6. I criticized the US mostly, and its "special relationship" peon the UK. In 1991 the UN didn't come through, but in 2003 it did, that's why the US pushed for the right to act unilaterally.

      The UN is a fairly large organization though. So it is conceivable that some people working there could be right, and some could be wrong, right? So this is not having it both ways, like saying that Montreal is 100% francophone and anglicized at the same time for example.

      According to your logic, if I criticize the US for warmongering and then I applaud it for inventing the internet, you'll accuse of of having it both ways. That doesn't hold up.

  10. Scots, wha hae wi Wallace bled,
    Scots, wham Bruce has aften led,
    Welcome tae yer gory bed,
    Or tae victorie.

    Now's the day, an now's the hour:
    See the front o battle lour,
    See approach proud Edward's power -
    Chains and Slaverie.

    Wha will be a traitor knave?
    Wha will fill a coward's grave?
    Wha sae base as be a slave?
    Let him turn an flee.

    Wha, for Scotland's king and law,
    Freedom's sword will strongly draw,
    Freeman stand, or Freeman fa,
    Let him on wi me.

    By Oppression's woes and pains,
    By your sons in servile chains!
    We will drain our dearest veins,
    But they shall be free.

    Lay the proud usurpers low,
    Tyrants fall in every foe,
    Liberty's in every blow! -
    Let us do or dee.

  11. Sadly this is happening all over Canada not just kebec. Look at Ontario, what a mess as they force this expensive phony french (bilingual) bs all across Ontario and Canada. Debt is mounting, a bloody mess.

    Scum bag parasitic unions,police,crown corporations,all government…all the same, bankrupting future generations…and they don’t give a damn.All you hear from government is high priced expensive spin, lies...BS.

    We now have over 3.6 million people working for government across the country. Average salary in government is 70 thousand (including benefits, pension, bonuses...) yearly and rising. Average salary in the private sector is 45 thousand yearly and dropping. Over 10% of government employees now make over 100 thousand yearly.In the private sector the number is under 2%. Look to Greece,Ireland,Quebec (all technically bankrupt), this is where Ontario, and Canada is headed if we don’t stop equalization and get spending and government growth under control. This tax and spend, pro union scum - socialist, big government, social engineering that has been destroying this country has got to stop. Yes, it has left Quebec and has been spreading throughout the rest of the country since the 1960”s, that’s right over 5 decades of massive government growth, massive government hiring, higher taxes, skyrocketing government salaries, more debt, social engineering ( the expensive forced phony charter, bilingualism, multiculturalism…while destroying, and revising our real BNA, UEL history).Thanks Trudeau, Tanks kebec.Go check the stats for yourself.

    Remember-The liberals, NDP brought in a lot of this expensive nonsense, bilingualism (forced french, only outside Quebec), multiculturalism, the charter, rights this, rights that…but the Conservatives have done nothing to repeal any of this crap federally or provincially.

    “Conservatives” have allowed all of these expensive, divisive liberal polices, and departments to remain.How come?

    Try to digest this you over paid scum bag politicians, unions, government bureaucrats, executives, CEOS….Who do you think is going to pay off all this debt you are leaving your children, your grandchildren? That’s what I thought, you don’t care! You greedy scum bags.They are all becoming wealthy off of the private sectors dime folks.

    We need a new party,a new leader willing to deal with the truth for a change.We need a real fiscally conservative, common sense leader/party…Things need to be cut,reduced and eliminated in all government.Government is too big,intrusive,and they are accumulating too much debt, year after year. That’s right lets get cutting non essential services, waste…government BS.The future is at stake here and no one is willing to deal with this, how pathetic, all of you clowns in office and most of the mainstream media..

    "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it; he is obligated to do so."-Thomas Jefferson

    1. The independence of Quebec will solve all of these problems for the Québécois nation.

    2. Yeah, the same thing for a drugged guy: inject some heroin, and everything is going to be nice ! But wait after you wake up...and also after 2-3 years of doing this :)
      I really want to see Marois burning his canadian passport ! ROFLMAO

    3. You have your conservative party - Harper has his majority. Exercising that majority is costing him his next government, since the NDP now leads in the polls. Seems like the majority of Canadians disagree with you.

    4. True, so let's not destroy our country Canada, or transform Quebec in a Haiti of North America. Let's focus on work, and next time let's KO the Conservatives. It's that simple.

    5. The increased debt level in Ontario is only partially from bilingualism, but the majority is from greening Ontario and a botched Health Ministry portfolio. The cost of putting the creation of e-filing cost over a billion dollars--BOTCHED JOB! A private company called Ornge was wasteful and the top exec was very generous with taxpayers' money; finally, hydro rates have gone nuts because the nuclear facilities cost a fortune to run, they're getting old so upgrades will cost a colossal fortune more, and getting rid of coal fired energy plants and replacing with something else (wind, nuclear, etc).

      Ontario also helped with the bailout of the auto industry, but I that with the auto manufacturers back on their feet, the Ontario government should sell the stocks they bought to pay off some of the debt.

      Lookit, I never said Ontario is perfect, and it is the rule rather than the exception where politicians aren't generous with themselves spending taxpayers' money. There is no perfection anywhere, but Ontario is far, far closer to it than Quebec. Too, Ontario is taking measures to fight its deficit where as Quebec is doing nothing, esp. if they give into the protestors. It looks as if Marois will.

    6. "The independence of Quebec will solve all of these problems for the Québécois nation"

      I feel deeply sorry for creatures like you...In some cases (and yours is one of them) euthanasia should be legal...


    7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    8. Your contempt against Canada is outrageous. The big difference between our country Canada and your petite province is that the former is a country even without the latter; the latter is nothing without the former. Who will recognise your quebec as a country? Canada?NO. The States?NO. Europe?NO.

      Your don't deserve to be Canadian, to have a Canadian passport or to have the Canadian citizenship. You should not even be allowed to vote.


    9. The States?NO...Pas certain.

      Avec qui vont-ils négocier les tarifs de notre Hydro-électricité...Le canaya?

    10. Canada?NO. The States?NO. Europe?NO.

      Vous êtes encore dans votre phase de "non" comme un bébé?...Héhé!

    11. "Avec qui vont-ils négocier les tarifs de notre Hydro-électricité...Le canaya?"

      You make this very incorrect assumption that the Quebec territory will not be divided after independence. If Canada is divisible, so is Quebec and seeing that most of your major Hydro plants are on Federal crown land you may not have any electricity to see to your US neighbors. You also make an incorrect assumption that Hydro will still belong to Quebec after independence. The Quebec portion of the Federal debt will be a major topic and seeing that Quebec is already indebted beyond repair Quebec will have no choice but to sell off provincial assets. Tough love in the real world, just ask Greeks or Argentineans.

    12. @Alexandre

      Alors si le Québec est divisible,les quartiers et les rues le seront tout autant? Héhé!

    13. Ce qui m'étonne et m'inquiète, c'est que la réponse typique anglo au sujet du séparatisme est

      1. Ça n'arrivera jamais
      2. Même si ça arrive, personne ne vous reconnaîtera ou acceptera votre indépendance
      3. Même si vous êtes reconnus, on va vous crosser et vous serez misérables

      Je me demandes si en Europe, les gens réagissent de la même façon à tous les nouveaux pays qui y figurent depuis les 20 dernières années : Le Monténégro, la Slovaquie, l'Écosse (peut-être - on verra l'année prochaine), la Macédoine et j'en passe.

      Pourquoi être si décidés à crosser le Québec s'il se sépare? Si on reconnaît le principe de l'auto-détermination des peuples, alors on devrait simplement accepter qu'un Québec qui veut se séparer se sépare.

    14. Pas de problème Yannick,nous connaissons bien la mentalité de nos ennemis.Ce qui est important pour l'instant c'est de les maintenir à leur place dans notre province.Il peuvent nous mépriser mais en silence.

    15. Yannick,

      Maybe the difference between Canada and Europe is that in Europe the new countries are made up of regions of a previous country while in Canada it is just one part of the country that wants to separate. Look at ex-Soviet Union, ex-Yugoslavia and ex-Czechoslovakia. Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia do not exist anymore. A better comparison perhaps is with Scotland if it manages to separate from the U.K. and Catalonia if it separates from Spain.

      The other factor is that we see the separatist movement as a half-baked movement. What I mean is that we do not see the movement as an all-out struggle for independence. As I wrote a number of times, the separatist government did not seem to be honest and sincere in the independence cause since in both referenda they held, never once did they ask about independence and/or separation from Canada.

    16. One major difference between Europe and North America is that Europe has gone through numerous military conflicts in its recent history which tempered its arrogance to some extent. North America hasn't experienced an armed conflict in a long time, unlike literally the rest of the world.

      As for the separatist movement, maybe it is half baked or maybe there is a method in this madness. What appears as indecisiveness to us is planned and orchestrated according to Reed Scowen (the author of Time to Say Goodbye). Scowen observes, correctly in my opinion, that uncertainty and lack of resolution is something that works in Quebec's favor. Therefore, the support for separation is always high enough to keep the RoC on its toes and keeps the asymmetry going, but not high enough to provide closure to the matter.

    17. It's a case of shit or get off the pot. We've had this "self-determination" card we've been dangling in front of the fed for the last half century, for no other reason than to foster drama in order to extract benefits from a federal system we spend the rest of our time vilifying.

      If we truly needed to be an independent country, we would already have become one. Our political motif is deliberately perpetuated to satisfy a simplistic age-old narrative that breaks everything down to us-good-French-victims and them-bad-English-opressors. Beneath this seemingly non-national-unity student protest movement, it's clear to see the proxy war pitting the government on the one hand and a disturbing alliance between the student groups and separatists/extreme leftists on the other.

    18. "If we truly needed to be an independent country, we would already have become one."

      L'histoire est en continuel mouvement,jamais rien de coulé dans le béton.

    19. "...according to Reed Scowen...Blablabla..."

      Vous arrive-t-il de réfléchir par vous-même adki?

    20. Yannick,

      Oui c'est assez typique.

      1. Ça n'arrivera jamais

      Ça arrivera peut-être ou ça n'arrivera peut-être. Une chose est sûre, quand ça va arriver, il y en a qui vont tomber des nues comme si on en avait jamais parlé avant...

      2. Même si ça arrive, personne ne vous reconnaîtera ou acceptera votre indépendance

      Quand le Vietnam a déclaré son indépendance, aucun pays n'a reconnu l'indépendance du Vietnam. En fait, c'est une erreur, un pays a reconnu le Vietnam : le Vietnam.

      Personnellement, je crois que le premier pays à reconnaître l'indépendance du Québec ne sera pas, contrairement à ce que plusieurs croient, la France, mais plutôt les États-Unis.

      3. Même si vous êtes reconnus, on va vous crosser et vous serez misérables

      C'est une attitude émotive. Pourtant, si le Canada a l'intention qu'on rembourse notre part de la dette, il a intérêt à ce que nous gardions une économie viable. Si l'Ontario désire toujours nous vendre des produits et des services, il faudra bien que nous gardions une économie viable. Peut-être que les ontariens, qui seront bien fâchés, voudront nous faire des misères. Mais on sait que bien des entreprises ontariennes ont des propriétaires américains. Est-ce que les américains vont accepter les égos froissés comme excuses pour ne pas commercer avec le Québec et ne pas atteindre les objectifs de ventes? Je ne crois pas.

      Au lendemain de la déclaration de l'indépendance du Québec, le gouvernement canadien en aura plein les bras à rassurer les marchés financiers à propos de sa capacité de rembourser ses dettes tout en ayant perdu un cinquième de sa population et de son économie. Est-e que manoeuvrer pour délibérément nuire au Québec et pour envenimer les choses sera dans l'intérêt de ce Canada occupé à rassurer les marchés financiers? Je ne crois pas.

      Les anglo-montréalais vont bien évidemment brasser de la marde et on criera à la partition. Mais comme l'a déjà dit l'Editor dans un précédent billet, il sera dans l'intérêt de tous de coopérer, pas par amour fraternel, mais pour protéger, entre autres, la valeur de nos maisons et des entreprises qui sont notre gagne-pain.

      Quoi qu'on dise et quoi qu'on fasse, il sera dans l'intérêt et du Québec et du Canada que les choses se fassent calmement.

    21. "If we truly needed to be an independent country, we would already have become one"

      Mute statement, because they will never get it. "Self-determination" is a form of political entitlement with no rational reasons. All separations we have seen in Europe are the result of emotions, not of the rationality, that's why the self-proclaimed Montenegro, even if independent and as a nation, is still struggling and will always struggle. The reason is simple: when emotions (or, better said, when politically-stirred emotions) take over rationality, consequences are not taken into account, that's why "Le Monténégro, la Slovaquie, l'Écosse (peut-être - on verra l'année prochaine), la Macédoine et j'en passe" will emotionally and politically succeed in separating (or have already succeeded in separating), but by sliding into an economic disaster, thus paying the price of this freedom (which is only emotional and political, so it's not freedom, but pure instinct).
      Quebec is on the verge of bankruptcy with a huge debt and it has progressively been sliding towards a hole. No separation is possible under these conditions.

      "L'histoire est en continuel mouvement,jamais rien de coulé dans le béton"

      Yes, we know, darling. From Thucydides to Plato till Giambattista Vico and many others the concept is clear, so you wrote nothing relevant, just parroting what you read on vigile or Le Pourboir. Don't teach that stuff to an European just to impress your seppie friends...

      "us-good-French-victims and them-bad-English-oppressors"

      They don't know it, Apparatchik. They have been so brainwashed that this "us-good-French-victims and them-bad-English-oppressors" has become an automatic, emotional mantra when any crisis looms on the horizon. All emotions, nothing thought or logically processed. That's why they will never ever succeed: they are too emotional and have no plans.


    22. "Yes, we know, darling. From Thucydides to Plato till Giambattista Vico and many others the concept is clear, so you wrote nothing relevant"

      C'est à Apparatchik qu'il faut le rappeler,pas à moi.

    23. I agree with the pointless emotionality behind the "self-determination" crap served up by nationalists in all places and times. It's idiotic here, it was idiotic in Europe, and it was idiotic of the Americans in their much-celebrated "patriot" struggle over two hundred years ago.

      In a strange way, perhaps our slow descent back to serfdom through modern-day capitalism could have been mankind's salvation. Unfortunately, with a return to serfdom comes a return to patronage by powerful "nobles". Alas, the more things change...

    24. Émotionalité? C'est le seul principe légitimisant la démocratie telle qu'on la comprend aujourd'hui. Si notre entiere conception du gouvernement n'est pas basée sur l'auto-détermination, sur quoi est-elle basée?

    25. This comment has been removed by the author.

    26. Troy,

      "As I wrote a number of times, the separatist government did not seem to be honest and sincere in the independence cause since in both referenda they held, never once did they ask about independence and/or separation from Canada."

      I don't want to uselessly insist, but I pointed out before that the first question went as far as defining sovereignty. And the second question was " Acceptez-vous que le Québec devienne souverain, [after giving one last try at reforming federalism]?"

    27. Avec qui vont-ils négocier les tarifs de notre Hydro-électricité...Le canaya?

      Very possibly: in an independent Quebec you'd have a banana-republic, whose government is openly hostile to anglophones everywhere, especially in North-America, with lots of natural resources trying to bully the 8,000lbs gorilla of the world's politics (and armies!) into paying prices high enough for energy (that the Yanks need) in order to fund their own regime and propaganda as well as buying the sheeple's consensus with public largesse. Last country in that position to try that was Iraq. Les Quebecouilles will insist that Canada keeps the Hydro plants before any decision is taken for fear of having to endure more English than they'd ever bargain for, because they are small-time bullies, not a death cult.

    28. Je préfère une république de bananes à une monarchie de concombres...

    29. In which case, time to learn your new National Anthem: O say can you see by the dawn's early light...

  12. Pauline a fait beaucoup de progrès in English:

  13. Editor,

    Yet another piece of news from CTV Montreal to feed your love-fest with UQAM. For me, I think they crossed the line. What they did is clearly illegal and they deserve to be put in the slammer. I am also glad that most of the comments on that piece support my position. They even praise the SQ to be more decisive than the SPVM.

    But what can I say. Your friend (is he not?) Premier runs law enforcement in a limp-dick fashion. Just drop the gauntlet, mobilize the troops, enforce the laws and protect those who do not want anything to do with the madness. I lost almost all sympathy what the little I have for the government. The only good thing that they still hold is because the PQ and QS are even crazier. I might need to bite the bullet and start looking at CAQ's platform.

  14. Another comment that I hope the Editor can pass to his Premier friend or those high in the political food chain.

    Historically, education in Germany was free. Several years ago most of the states started charging fees. The students protested. So the police went in force. The students were hosed with water from fire engines (or riot vehicles like the Editor posted), sprayed with pepper and then arrested. Protests were quickly shut down.

    The whole episode lasted just several weeks. Education activities were not substantially affected. Are we going to say then that Germany is less democratic than Quebec?

  15. "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.” Derek Bok, President, Harvard U.

    Says it all.

  16. Graphique plutôt intéressanr :

  17. Boomers started this entitlement society and not surprisingly they're also the ones who spoiled and pampered this generation of youngsters. So when will this wrinkled population look itself in the mirror and say NO to all their entitlements (which has plunged this province and country in the hundreds of billions in the red)? Blame the kids all you want but we know who's really responsible for this mess.

    1. @anon 8:06

      Absolutely correct. Entitleitus is a learned behavior. The entitlement society has been in existence for many decardes in Quebec, sponsored in general by Ottawa and the ROC attempting to buy Quebec's allegiance whilst at the same time the seppie governments within Quebec (PQ) were upping the antie to garner support to their side...In essence a bidding war for the votes of the people of Quebec. For more on this see Brian Crowleys book "Fearful Symmetry". I think everyone is recognizant of the fact that you cannot borrow your way out of debt.

    2. I agree with alot of you about some of the outrageous demands by the ultra lefties and govt worker unions. On the other hand what will soon become an entitlement? I mean is the Canada Pension Plan, Employment insurance, universal healthcare also going to be considered an "entitlement" in the near future. Alot of these benefits we have now, is the difference between a developed first world economy that is stable and benefits all classes of society including the upper classes and that of an anarchic lack of social safety net 3rd world economies.

      The great depression wasn't that long ago in historical and generational terms. Alot of the social safety net was enacted to prevent almost total economic collapse and near societal collapse that accompanied the stock market crash of 1929.

      I'm more worried about incentives to offshore jobs from manufacturing, IT, customer service and in a possible future trend as in the united states accounting and even taxation.

      I'd be more worried about the globalization shoved down our throats then the perks many govt workers. Not that I am saying we shouldn't focus on bureaucratic and politician excesses. Even in the corporate sector the executive classes and board alot more about the exec interest vs shareholders interests.

    3. Anon 11:54am, spot on.

      Entitlement is a real problem in North America which doesn't remember a war and has been blessed with good economy. Americans, Quebeckers, and Canadians want more more more and more. However, the time is coming when prosperity runs out and a rude awakening will follow, and when we all have to tighten our belts.

      However, that does not mean that right wing reactionaries aren't plotting to set us back a 100 years to the times when people worked 15 hour shifts for slave wages.

    4. adski,

      That is why I can not wrap my head around Prof. Guay's opinion. For a sociologist, he seems to have strange understanding of the mindset of Quebecers. Like it or not, culturally Quebec is part of Canada which is part of Can-Am culture. Many Quebecers who have lived in France attested that the only common thing, culturally, between Quebec and France is the language. And looking at common cultural traits between Quebec and RoC, the major differential is language. What I mean is, language aside, Quebec is culturally much, much more North American than it is European.

      Because of that, Quebec society - franco, anglo and allo - is generally not a frugal society. And this is not necessarily something good or bad. But the fact remains that what he suggests is not what is normally done around here. It may work in Europe with European social structure but I have my doubt about here. After all, geography plays important roles too. If the whole continent lives in a certain standard of living, I am not sure that a small portion of the continent does not compare itself with the rest.

      I am not sure that Quebec society is ready to leave its chalet, its Florida or Cuba vacation, its alcoholic consumption so that its students can across-the-board free education, so that others can get free in-vitro, so that public transport is free. We can say that he only proposes to tax the very rich, but how good can it be? How many people can afford $400k second home? It will be just a drop in a bucket. For the "sin tax" to work standards need to be lowered. Before we know it, a Honda Civic will be considered subject for "sin tax" to finance what he proposes.

      If this is a comment from a full professor at UQAM, no wonder that the Editor and others here does not speak highly for the institution. So bad. And he is indeed a full professor at UQAM. Unfortunately UQAM does not list his credentials on its site for us to know where the professor comes from.

  18. How exactly does this help their cause?

    1. Anonymous at 08:44,

      Interestingly, the members of the media disrespected by the protesters in that article are all from English-language media. There are three possibilities:

      1. The Gazette only showing the English victim-reporters.
      2. French-language media did not care about the event and did not cover it.
      3. The students knew which reporters were anglophones and only attacked them.

    2. Aux paranos anglos:

  19. Du jamais vu au Québec...Sacré Johnny boy!

  20. OMG! LOL!!!!

    “A good father does not call the police into his home to solve a problem with his children. A good father addresses his children and talks to them to settle a crisis,” Mr. Bureau-Blouin said.

    1. They are all what psychologists call les enfants-rois, which fits with the quebecois mentality (=tu donnes, je reçois; tu paies, je reçois; tu gagnes X, je prends X, Y, Z et W).


  21. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  22. Est-ce que ce blogue est administré par Johnny Charest ou quoi?

  23. Quebec will screw itself without the help of the ROC.

  24. Un allo qui se nomme lord durham ?Assez étrange...Hmmmm

  25. Is it constitutionally viable for the island of Montreal and the western areas to hold a referendum for seperation from Quebec and to become part of Ontario? I've bought in to the concept of regional majority and since anglophones and allophones represent the majority in these areas, shouldn't we exercise our democratic right to leave as les Quebecois have tried before? The political and social structure of this province is a hopeless case after forty years of propaganda, racialized politics and the rampant sense of entitlement of the uberphones - time to go and to take the city WE built with us.

  26. "...time to go and to take the city WE built with us."

    Qui?Les immigrants allophones?...Hahahahaha!De toute façon,il aurait fallu que vous agissiez avant.Les 5% d'anglo historique n'ont plus aucun pouvoir,encore pire l'ensemble des anglos du Québec n'ont plus aucune représentation officielle.Comment allez-vous procèder?

    1. Sabotage, gouvernement fédéral militant (ça s'en vient), humiliation de la cause séparatiste et ruine complète de votre projet de "pays". Ce ne sont pas seulement les milices de losers séparatistes qui savent soulever de la poussière.

      Moi j'aime ça quand ça brasse, et encore plus quand les plus puissants font manger de la marde aux vierges offensées séparatistes. Quel beau plaisir que sera de vous voir écrasés une fois pour toutes. Vous avez beau espérer un gouvernement péquiste prochain; celui-ci sera vite porté à genoux contre ses ennemis jurés.

    2. "Sabotage, gouvernement fédéral militant (ça s'en vient), humiliation de la cause séparatiste et ruine complète de votre projet de "pays""

      Est-ce que c'est supposé être un phénomène nouveau?Ou vous êtes simplement déconnecté de la politique canadienne depuis un sacré bout temps ?

    3. "Quel beau plaisir que sera de vous voir écrasés une fois pour toutes"

      Ça fait 400 ans que les anglos essaient :)

    4. "L'histoire est en continuel mouvement,jamais rien de coulé dans le béton."

      hihihi nous vaincrons. vous serez vaincus!

    5. Sabotage, gouvernement fédéral militant (ça s'en vient)

      Le RoC se câlisse de la communauté anglo de Montréal,vous n'avez aucune idée.

  27. Breaking news :

    Alerte à la bombe au parlement.

    1. Serait-ce un coup de tes copains des JPQ?

    2. Charest a tellement d'ennemis qu'il est difficile de savoir d'ou proviennent ou proviendront les attaques.

    3. Belle façon d'esquiver la question. Votre réponse est donc oui; tout à fait prévisible. À quelle cellule apparteniez-vous et votre fils déjà?

    4. La cellule voisine de vos amis italiens.

    5. pourtant Gino ne vous reconnait pas. Et il n'oublie jamais un visage, même une face de boeuf.

    6. Nous avions remarqué que les amateurs d'enveloppes brunes ont la mémoire courte.