A Canadian lurker needs to clear up some misconceptions here...

 

Toronto outdated, poor, and tacky? :lol: Let's move to Michigan and hit that dank growing in the closet for "medical" reasons.

 

It is poor and tacky. Canada has about 1/4th less GDP per capita than the United States. Kinda sad when you consider they're a smaller country and don't even have the advantage of GDP in quantitative terms like China.

 

China's GDP per capita is much lower than Canada's; so the only way China comes on top is gross GDP, which - comparing a country of 1 billion people to 30 million people - perhaps isn't so surprising.  Besides, poverty and GDP per capita are unrelated.  There is a difference between total wealth and the distribution of wealth.  So...  yes, the rich are definitely richer in US than in Canada.  What good does it personally do you that the richest people in the world live in US?

 

What about the rest of the population?  How is the pie distributed?  Well, we can turn over to the GINI index, and what do we find?  We find that US's GINI is closer to Mexico than it is to Canada.  Poverty and child poverty rates are considerably higher in the United States.  Under no metric would Canada be considered 'poor.' 

 

Investment in terms of urban development hits big cities around the world before anywhere else because it's a sure bet and provides a bigger return on investment. So when you look at how big Toronto is, it's kind of a let down seeing so many hideous buildings from the 60s/70s and nothing remodeled. Besides, it bothers me that they don't like us and think we're imperialist warmongers when Russia would have taken them over by now if we didn't cover their @ss all these decades with our large military and political clout as a bordering country with a stake in Alaska.  Canada always has and always will be our b!tch. Just look how they agressively patrol and protect the arctic knowing we're right there on the bottom bunk if something goes down.

 

Yes, plenty corbusier buildings from the 1970s.  Why would they be remodeled?  That was the architecture of that time and they are a partly responsible for Toronto's density, and what makes it such an urban experience in the first place.  As for investments, Toronto has far more condominium starts than any place in North America besides NYC.  So, I'm not sure how we're outdated, either, with the 2nd largest building boom on the continent.

 

Canadians don't dislike Americans by and large.  They do dislike the American government.  So does the majority of the world, and at the moment, the majority of the Americans. 

 

Besides why should we like someone who notes "Canada always has and always will be our b!tch?"  This type of arrogance is hard to like, yes?  America spends more on military than all the other countries combined, so yes, it's going to be hard to match that level of spending.  However, Canada's military spending is comparable to G20 per capita median. 

 

 

And Toronto does beat Chicago in international flavor. The immigrant flow in Toronto is probably tops in North America. Hell, it's got to be among the top in the world.

 

I don't care about diversity that much. Different cultures can all learn from one another but at the end of the day I don't have much in common with a Stri Lankan immigrant. I would argue that Torontonians are probably so exposed to diversity that they're more numb to it and indifferent.

 

Generally, it's agreed upon the people living in Toronto that this diversity is one of the city's great strengths.  Diversity adds greatly to the city experience.  I see you've been to Kensigton, a place completely transformed by Asians, South Americans, and Jamaicans.  It'd be a completely different neighbourhood without this influence, and a homogeneous Toronto would be a very different city.  I would make a similar observation about NYC, and I hardly see the populace as being 'numb' to the diverse influences.

 

 

 

China's GDP per capita is much lower than Canada's; so the only way China comes on top is gross GDP, which - comparing a country of 1 billion people to 30 million people - perhaps isn't so surprising.  Besides, poverty and GDP per capita are unrelated.  There is a difference between total wealth and the distribution of wealth.  So...  yes, the rich are definitely richer in US than in Canada.  What good does it personally do you that the richest people in the world live in US?

 

I'm aware that China's GDP per capita is very low. It would take at least 50 years for them to catch up to the GDP per capita we enjoy in the U.S or even Canada.

 

My basic point is that U.S. is where it's at if you're rich. You're better off in Canada if you're middle class or poor. Granted, there are quite a few Canadian billionaires.

 

 

What about the rest of the population?  How is the pie distributed?  Well, we can turn over to the GINI index, and what do we find?  We find that US's GINI is closer to Mexico than it is to Canada.  Poverty and child poverty rates are considerably higher in the United States.  Under no metric would Canada be considered 'poor.'  

 

I wish you would have picked up on my off-color sarcasm but you're a new poster. I said before, I respect the fact that Canada cares more about poverty and healthcare.

 

 

Yes, plenty corbusier buildings from the 1970s.  Why would they be remodeled?  That was the architecture of that time and they are a partly responsible for Toronto's density, and what makes it such an urban experience in the first place.  As for investments, Toronto has far more condominium starts than any place in North America besides NYC.  So, I'm not sure how we're outdated, either, with the 2nd largest building boom on the continent.

 

If Canada had the money to knock many of those Cubusier buildings down, I think they would. If they're truely happy with them, then that's a little disturbing to me. People hate the ones we still have in America. It's hardly representative of current trends in development.

 

Canadians don't dislike Americans by and large.  They do dislike the American government.  So does the majority of the world, and at the moment, the majority of the Americans. 

 

Everyone always says that. "We like you, we just don't like your government". It undermines our intelligence as we're quite aware we live in a democracy. Majority liked Bush at first, then he got us into a huge mess and Kerry wasn't that great so we re-elected him. Now we finally booted his @ss out of there. So when you think of Obama, think of the majority of America :)

 

Besides why should we like someone who notes "Canada always has and always will be our b!tch?"  This type of arrogance is hard to like, yes?  America spends more on military than all the other countries combined, so yes, it's going to be hard to match that level of spending.  However, Canada's military spending is comparable to G20 per capita median. 

 

Okay, I'll rephrase it. The world is out b!tch. You can take the moral highground. We're even.

 

 

Generally, it's agreed upon the people living in Toronto that this diversity is one of the city's great strengths.  Diversity adds greatly to the city experience.  I see you've been to Kensigton, a place completely transformed by Asians, South Americans, and Jamaicans.  It'd be a completely different neighbourhood without this influence, and a homogeneous Toronto would be a very different city.  I would make a similar observation about NYC, and I hardly see the populace as being 'numb' to the diverse influences.

 

They're numb in the sense that diversity creates a large group of strangers that don't really know or care much about each other unless the same groups of people remain for a very long time. If I lived in Kensington, I would probably feel completely anonymous. I just don't think racial diversity is all it's cracked up to be. It's something that liberal intellectuals promote because it sounds right. IMO the most important thing to consider in terms of diversity is economic inclusion, of course that often means transcending racial barriers.

 

Welcome to the forum salvius and thanks for that informative post!

"If Canada had the money to knock many of those Cubusier buildings down, I think they would. If they're truely happy with them, then that's a little disturbing to me. People hate the ones we still have in America. It's hardly representative of current trends in development".

 

Umm what makes you think "Canada" doesn't? have the money? Besides, if there was a desire to knocked down, that would be up to the municipality, not "Canada". And hey, as far as buildings themselves go, different strokes for different folks.

 

 

And in regards to Canada's military spending, the comment made earlier is totally right. Here is an article regarding that spending

 

 

Federal government quietly releases $490B military plan

Details posted online Thursday night

 

The Conservative government has quietly released the details of its extensive plan to beef up the military, including spending $490 billion over the next 20 years to ensure Canadian soldiers are well-equipped, well-trained and highly active.

 

Details of the plan, known as Canada First Defence Strategy, were posted Thursday night without fanfare on the Department of National Defence's website.

 

The posting comes almost six weeks after Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced at a news conference that his government had a strategy for the military but provided few details about it. Critics at the time said the strategy was nothing more than a speech, since Harper offered no document to back it up.

 

Speaking in Halifax on Friday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay defended the nighttime posting of the plan, saying the government was simply striving to provide more specifics about the strategy to Canadians.

 

Military analyst Rob Huebert told CBC News that he can't understand why Harper would release the document so quietly, and why he would do so the day before the House of Commons is expected to adjourn for the summer.

 

Still, he praised the document's contents, saying the strategy appears to be a well-balanced assessment that juggles the military's commitments at home and overseas.

 

"I'm hard-pressed right at this point, looking at it, to be really overtly critical," said Huebert, associate director of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies in Calgary. "I do think they've got a good balance on this particular aspect."

 

The opposition also questioned the timing and delivery of the announcement in Parliament Thursday.

 

Liberal MP Rodger Cuzner said posting the information online in the "dead of night" sounded like the actions of "a government with something to hide."

 

But Laurie Hawn, MacKay's parliamentary secretary, pointed to Harper's previous announcement, saying the information had already been posted on the government website and that Canadians "wanted more details on it."

 

$60 billion on equipment

The document, which stresses the importance of giving the Canadian Forces predictable and stable funding, says $60 billion must be spent on much-needed military equipment, such as helicopters, patrol ships, planes, destroyers, frigates, land combat vehicles and weapons.

 

A total of $15 billion of these equipment purchases has already been confirmed and announced publicly.

 

Other military spending over the next 20 years is to include:

 

$250 billion on personnel, with the military's numbers increasing to 70,000 regular members and 30,000 reserve members. (Currently, there are 62,000 regular members and 25,000 reservists.)

$140 billion on training and maintenance of equipment.

$40 billion on military buildings and infrastructure.

The document suggests that in the next 20 years, the international community will be coping with failed states, rogue nuclear nations and the increasing threat of terrorism. It also notes that the military needs to enhance its ability to operate alongside U.S. forces.

 

"The Canada First Defence Strategy will enable the Forces to … address the full range of defence and security challenges facing Canada now and into the future," the document states. "This strengthened military will translate into enhanced security for Canadians at home as well as a stronger voice for Canada on the world stage."

 

Six core duties for the military

The document says the Canadian Forces will have six core duties over the next 20 years and will often have to juggle more than one duty at once in Canada and overseas.

 

The duties are:

 

Conducting daily domestic and continental operations, including protecting Arctic sovereignty.

Supporting a major international event in Canada, such as the 2010 Olympics.

Responding to any major terrorist attacks.

Providing aid to civilian authorities during natural disasters and other crises in Canada.

Conducting a major international operation for an extended period, such as the Afghan mission.

Have enough troops remaining to deploy to other international crises for shorter periods of time.

NDP defence critic Dawn Black questioned why the document does not stress the peacekeeping work of Canadian soldiers.

 

"The more and more we become meshed with American foreign policy… the less and less ability we have to be independent and have a clear Canadian voice on the international stage."

 

"If Canada had the money to knock many of those Cubusier buildings down, I think they would. If they're truely happy with them, then that's a little disturbing to me. People hate the ones we still have in America. It's hardly representative of current trends in development".

 

Umm what makes you think "Canada" doesn't? have the money? Besides, if there was a desire to knocked down, that would be up to the municipality, not "Canada". And hey, as far as buildings themselves go, different stocks for different folks.

 

Maybe they just have bad taste. I dont know. Do you know why they like them? Isn't Canada suppose to be progressive? Shouldn't they be leading the way in mixed, integrated market rate/subsidized housing? Where are their public-private development corporations? It seems odd to me that they love Cubusier towers. Knock that sh!t down, it's ugly and it isn't socially progressive.

"If Canada had the money to knock many of those Cubusier buildings down, I think they would. If they're truely happy with them, then that's a little disturbing to me. People hate the ones we still have in America. It's hardly representative of current trends in development".

 

Umm what makes you think "Canada" doesn't? have the money? Besides, if there was a desire to knocked down, that would be up to the municipality, not "Canada". And hey, as far as buildings themselves go, different strokes for different folks.

 

Maybe they just have bad taste. I don't know. Do you know why they like them? Isn't Canada suppose to be progressive? Shouldn't they be leading the way in mixed, integrated market rate/subsidized housing? Where are their public-private development corporations? It seems odd to me that they love Cubusier towers. Knock that sh!t down, it's ugly and it isn't socially progressive.

 

As I stated before, different strokes for different folks. And with all due respect, your opinion isn't the gold standard! And David, were you asleep when you were in the T-dot?? There are all sorts of interestint developments going on. The ROM comes to mind, although I personally HATE the addition! And besides, I think your energy would be better directed at the abominations still standing in YOUR OWN country eh! =-0) Cheers

 

P.S. Forgive the typos

Yeah, different strokes for different folks. It doesn't bother me that people like Canadian cities more than U.S. cities. - it shouldn't bother others that I like U.S. cities more. It's subjective. But it 's fun to critique both sides.

>I'm immigrating there, I have friends there, and I lived there and went to school there.

 

So are you a US citizen or what exactly?  Seems pretty nutty to hear someone identify so closely with a country that they're not a citizen of.  Life must be terrible up there in Columbus.   

>I'm immigrating there, I have friends there, and I lived there and went to school there.

 

So are you a US citizen or what exactly?  Seems pretty nutty to hear someone identify so closely with a country that they're not a citizen of.  Life must be terrible up there in Columbus.   

 

Personally, I don't give two s*&ts what you think. And hummmm, lets think about this, if I'm immigrating from the US to Canada, its a safe bet that I'm a US citizen. And it seems I'm not alone, thousands of people from the US have immigrated to Canada at various points in time. And of course if you'd bother to pay attention, you'd know I'm live in Cleveland for school, although I'm from Columbus....idiot. 

>I'm immigrating there, I have friends there, and I lived there and went to school there.

 

So are you a US citizen or what exactly?  Seems pretty nutty to hear someone identify so closely with a country that they're not a citizen of.  Life must be terrible up there in Columbus.   

 

And it seems I'm not alone, thousands of people from the US have immigrated to Canada at various points in time.

 

just as there are thousands of Canadians who have immigrated to the US! (hello!?) ...in addition to the hundreds of thousands from around the world who come here every year, creating massive backlogs in the system (as Wikipedia shows: "Since 2000, legal immigrants to the United States number approximately 1,000,000 per year, of whom about 600,000 are Change of Status immigrants who already are in the U.S. Legal immigrants to the United States now are at their highest level ever at over 37,000,000 legal immigrants."--I believe that figure is higher than the total population of Canada!!) But I guess people are gluttons for punishment. Why else would they want to live in such a "repressive" place as the U.S. of A.?? :roll:

Canda doesn't have to deal with the burden of illegal mexicans coming into their country. With the way our system is in the U.S., you have people paying their own health insurance premiums plus excess in taxes to cover illegals.

 

If you're a highly educated and skilled immigrant, USA is more tempting since your taxes will be lower. Canada is better for lower class immigrants.

 

If Mexico bordered Canada, they would have a SERIOUS, SERIOUS illegal immigrant problem!

Canda doesn't have to deal with the burden of illegal mexicans coming into their country. With the way our system is in the U.S., you have people paying their own health insurance premiums plus excess in taxes to cover illegals.

 

If you're a highly educated and skilled immigrant, USA is more tempting since your taxes will be lower. Canada is better for lower class immigrants.

 

If Mexico bordered Canada, they would have a SERIOUS, SERIOUS illegal immigrant problem!

 

Low Class? Like the average American? lol Okay, and I are friends, and I respect you, however, that "Low Class" comment was beyond ignorant. Go to Immigration Canad's website, you will see there are alot of strict criteria you have to meet to immigrate.

>I'm immigrating there, I have friends there, and I lived there and went to school there.

 

So are you a US citizen or what exactly?  Seems pretty nutty to hear someone identify so closely with a country that they're not a citizen of.  Life must be terrible up there in Columbus.   

 

And it seems I'm not alone, thousands of people from the US have immigrated to Canada at various points in time.

 

just as there are thousands of Canadians who have immigrated to the US! (hello!?) ...in addition to the hundreds of thousands from around the world who come here every year, creating massive backlogs in the system (as Wikipedia shows: "Since 2000, legal immigrants to the United States number approximately 1,000,000 per year, of whom about 600,000 are Change of Status immigrants who already are in the U.S. Legal immigrants to the United States now are at their highest level ever at over 37,000,000 legal immigrants."--I believe that figure is higher than the total population of Canada!!) But I guess people are gluttons for punishment. Why else would they want to live in such a "repressive" place as the U.S. of A.?? :roll:

 

And? I'm aware of the fact that the US allows thousands to immigrate. And have you ever tried to immigrate to Canada? Trust, as someone who has begun the process, its just as long an ordeal to get into Canada as it is to get into the US! And just FYI, Canada also allows thousands of people every year. But I'm sure you are aware of that eh? And since was wikipedia a valid source of info. If I cited that in a paper I'd get a nice big fat F!

 

"In 2007, Canada admitted 429,649 permanent residents, temporary foreign workers and foreign students. This number is more than 60,000 higher than it was just four years ago."

 

"Canada’s fast growing economy means labour demands will also continue to grow in the next few years. The most recent Census indicates that in the past five years, Canada’s population grew by 1.6 million—with 1.1 million being the result of immigration."

 

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/DEPARTMENT/MEDIA/RELEASES/2008/2008-03-14.asp

Yeah, the average person I guess. I just used it in reference to higher.

 

If you're (I know I'm being stereotypical but it is what it is) an Indian engineer or doctor, universal healthcare isn't going to be your concern. Canada seems like a great country for the average person or poor person in a foreign country to improve their life. U.S. is better if you're educated or concerned with being rich. That's probably not true in every case but more often than not.

Yeah, the average person I guess. I just used it in reference to higher.

 

If you're (I know I'm being stereotypical but it is what it is) an Indian engineer or doctor, universal healthcare isn't going to be your concern. Canada seems like a great country for the average person or poor person in a foreign country to improve their life. U.S. is better if you're educated or concerned with being rich. That's probably not true in every case but more often than not.

 

Okay, we are friends, but that comment was outta line! Are you calling me "Low Class" because I would be an immigrate?? I mean I have a college education and I still want to live there!

Now you're just being ridiculous. Obviously, the terminology for social classes are vague. I said it's not true in every case, probably more often than not that America attracts higher class immigrants. If you're in a field that would make you potentially wealthy by immigrating or are looking to expand your business, it makes sense that said person would decide to live in the country with lower taxes. After all, most people move to better themselves. Moving to a country because the people are nice or because there's more diversity, is pretty rare. People generally care more about their own goals than the ideology of a country. A million people in America threaten to move to Canada every year because they don't like certain things but that doesn't mean they do.

Get it back on topic (aka the photos), folks. :roll:

 

 

Man, oh man, I can't get enough of Toronto. What a f$&king city, my favorite of the Great Lakes, even more than Chicago.

 

As much as we disagree I'm right there with you. I love Chicago, but if I had to choose between the two, it'd be Toronto.

 

F*%king amazing in every category. Chicago is cool as hell but it's a financial titan, Toronto's Downtown is THE place to be in almost all areas.

Get it back on topic (aka the photos), folks. :roll:

 

Sorry MayDay, didn't see your post until after I posted mine, because it was a "quick post" from the previous page.

Listen everyone.

 

When all is said and done in this thread, the only bad thing about Canada is their only hip-hop artist Kardinal Offishall.  Offishally Kanadian needs to stop invading the US airwaves, but let our own artists infiltrate Canadian society by cutting Kardinal out of all the 30% home airplay slots they play non-stop in Toronto.  In his place, we'll dump more T.I., Lil Wayne, and and as a bonus we'll ship all our Akon tracks to you as well, since Canadian hip-hop radio stations already love Akon's music so much.

They sure do.  Flow...needs an upgrade.

Listen everyone.

 

When all is said and done in this thread, the only bad thing about Canada is their only hip-hop artist Kardinal Offishall. 

 

I heard he just got shot the other day in front of Hooker-Harveys (or Mmmarvelous Mmmuffins, I can't remember which).

Oh okay.  At the Scarborough Town Center??  Had to be there...just had to.

My post was only a tease of Kardinal Offishall, who in reality I have nothing against.  He's a talented artist, but overplayed in Toronto (especially because of home airplay rules) as Lil Wayne is the U.S.  I realize there are plenty of other artists.  I basically intended a response from Colday and David, which it did.  Sorry it produced a rant considering my first post is just me saying b.s.  Regardless, I do appreciate your response as it is informative.

Neil Young is the singular figure who towers over Canada's musical output.  Arcade Fire is a good band from Quebec although the frontman/songwriter/mastermind was raised in Texas and is a US citizen so I don't think they really count.  Canada can't claim a single original music style or art form, unlike the US, which has coined at least 10 distinctly new musical styles, invented countless instruments like the electric guitar, Hammond organ, electronic sythesizer, etc. 

 

Bonus...this is my friend's little brother and his wife.  She is from the northernmost part of Alberta just an hour south of Eskimo territory yet has a southern accent.  Actually a ton of people in Canada have southern/appalachian accents.  Billy's criminal record keeps him from visiting Canada so he had to sneak through the woods and across the border in North Dakota one time a few years back.

 

 

Listen everyone.

 

When all is said and done in this thread, the only bad thing about Canada is their only hip-hop artist Kardinal Offishall. Offishally Kanadian needs to stop invading the US airwaves, but let our own artists infiltrate Canadian society by cutting Kardinal out of all the 30% home airplay slots they play non-stop in Toronto. In his place, we'll dump more T.I., Lil Wayne, and and as a bonus we'll ship all our Akon tracks to you as well, since Canadian hip-hop radio stations already love Akon's music so much.

 

LOL I would second that! Canadian hip hop is not my thing eh! lol

Canada can't claim a single original music style or art form, unlike the US, which has coined at least 10 distinctly new musical styles, invented countless instruments like the electric guitar, Hammond organ, electronic sythesizer, etc.

 

I know, and that's what makes the state of mainstream music in America today all the more pathetic. We used to be top in the world without argument. Now it's questionable. We reward a lot of garbage in this country. We used to reward talent and creativity.

 

Bonus...this is my friend's little brother and his wife. She is from the northernmost part of Alberta just an hour south of Eskimo territory yet has a southern accent. Actually a ton of people in Canada have southern/appalachian accents.

 

It's mostly concentrated in Calgary and Alberta. Again, Calgary is the Nashville/Houston of Canada. It has a a big influence in that part of the country. It's country-fried and not very progressive, and it produces the bulk of country music in Canada. It's also their most sprawled city, much like your average American city. But I've always suspected southern accents in Canada are by choice. Some people (country music fans) may like southern accents because it makes them feel country-fried.

 

But in most of Canada, southern accents have no penetration like they do even in just Ohio. I've never heard a southern accent in Toronto or Niagara, or even Ontario for that matter, and I've spent a lot of time in the sparsely populated parts of Ontario. Most of Ontario speaks with a nasally Great Lakes accent (really not much different from most people in Detroit and Toledo). I don't think people on the Great Lakes realize how much some of their accents sound like Ontario aceents. I used to not notice it either, but after living in Athens, I picked up on some hilarious nasal and "o" sounds back home. I actually laugh at Carty Finkbeiner's voice now. It's like a mix of a stereotypical Chicago accent and a stereotypical Canadian accent.

 

 

I think you're over romanticizing the past here a bit, C-Dawg. America has always rewarded and supported crappy popular music.  Many of the great American heroes of the past were in fact on the fringe, and it was only past their time that they were embraced.  Dillon was very much a Greenwich Village phenom, Hendrix moved to England, and Run DMC was restricted to New York early in their careers.  The U.S. is still a leader of innovation and progress in music today.

Why on earth would you compare Hendrix to Nickelback or Soulja Boy? They're from two completely different time periods. They have different influences. If Hendrix grew up in the same era as Nickelback, he would have a completely different sound.

 

 

This is a thread about Toronto! Jimi Hendrix doesn't have anything to do with Canada. He's from Seattle, not Vancouver!

 

Yeah, AIC had an influence on current bands, but AIC had their own influences. Your logic makes no sense. Every band is influenced by a band that was influenced, by a band that was influenced by some band. Soulja Boy might be popular here (among young people btw) but soulja boy wouldn't have existed 15-20 years ago along with Rakim or NWA or whoever else. None of the OGs of rap approve of soulja boy. Artists become popular when society is ready for it. Hendrix was for anti-war hippies. Bands/artists have more in common with others from the same time period than past generations, with only a few exceptions like Amy Winehouse or John Mayer.

 

Please respond to this post in your newly created thread you're making.