Quote:
Originally Posted by maclock
You appear to have been indulging in projection from the beginning of our exchange. The reasons why you have been doing so elude me. I explained why Ontario was mentioned. You seem to have ignored that, preferring to characterise me as some unsophisticated individual from the regions who received tales from my elders down at the jetty about how we got short-changed. You must remember that the tariff regime which we are discussing and which was in place for more than a century was not dismantled until less than 30 years ago. This isn't ancient history. It seems pretty clear to me that you tried to impugn my credibility from the very first steps of this exchange.
You've been posting here long enough to understand that pdw is well-known to support tariffs and other government intervention in trading that many of us have repeatedly rejected. Again, I explained why Ontario was mentioned. The government action pdw might prefer to see was undertaken in the past to benefit commercial interests in the region between lying between Montreal and Windsor. Those arrangements were fully intended to allow those interests to prosper at the expense of the regions. I have explained myself as clearly as I can and I have tried to avoid getting personal. You, on the other hand, have taken to writing multi-paragraph replies questioning me and my motives. You refuse to engage on the issues. Instead, you seem to focus on me. This appears to be similar to how you conducted yourself in that supposedly "long dead thread" which saw the bulk of its activity three-to-four short weeks ago. I don't know what more I can say. Have a great day.
|
Here's the beginning of our exchange:
Now why on earth did you add that last bit?
I was in almost total agreement with you until you introduced that canard to the discussion.
Ontario was the engine driving this train for many decades and I don't recall any of US moaning about being net contributors while others were net recipients. Even while I lived in N.S. & B.C. I never heard this 'acrimony-generating' whining emanating from they or from other provinces.
You're introducing that 'us ag'in them', Hatfield vs McCoy silliness of two parties glaring at each other across the great divide nonsense, notably characteristic of other countries currently floundering, that serves no useful purpose but to focus on either throwing rocks or kizzing each others butt while the country as a whole staggers to a grinding halt.
Stop with the Ontario bashing please. A White Rose is supposed to be nothing more than a beautiful flower.
I focus on you because you have resorted to the personal when responding; why would I take umbrage with anyone else? Why would I engage on the issue when that issue is directed towards only one Province? You cannot seem to resist resorting to the personal references when I've made my position perfectly clear from that first response: I have no issue with the mention of Ontario but rather the way in which you mentioned it.
We are not as citizens of Ontario any more responsible for what FEDERAL Legislators enact as economic policy and whatever PDW's position regarding free trade or tariffs, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with castigating only Ontario for the whole of that position. ALL provinces have been the beneficiary or victim of particular tariffs, quotas, etc., negotiated or enacted by the Federal entity; yours included. That is the only engaging on the issue your original post I took umbrage to warrants. Whatever came after is your attempts to legitimize the original statement I objected to. There is no justification for slighting a whole province's population due to one poster's mention of Free Trade.
I have entreated you throughout many posts on here, in as diplomatic a fashion as I'm capable of to refrain from the personal references of character, but even here, once again, you go with another.
For someone who claims to occupy the high ground you seem to have little reluctance to engage in the pettiness you describe in others.
We have said it all, and then some, over and over again and I don't see either of us convincing the other of the relative ethical or moral superiority of their position.
This is my last rejoinder on the issue so make your next one your best one as it will be the last word.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
