Canada is considered developed country simply because it is near the USA; however, the uncontrolled immigration, quacks and incapable people, and communism from Asia, Middle East and South America will destroy the democracy and freedom in Canada and will eventually make Canada another Brazil.

I think Canada shall not continue to be a member a G8 because even current China's living standards and economy is much better than Canada, and lots of countries such as Australia, the Netherlands, and Denmark are much much advanced, modern and developed than Canada. Compared with these high standard countries, Canada is simply a developing and poor country.

The educational corruption in Canada is very severe. There is no university entrance exam in Canada, and university admits students on the basis of their high school final year scores. In order to earn money, the private schools in Canada give every students high scores in order to earn money. The average score in Canadian high school is about 98 out 100 in maths, but those students who get 100 in maths do not even know Sin30 degree is 0.5. And even Canadian university professors do not know how to prove it either, though they claim they got PhD in maths. This fact hightlights how poor and corrupt Canadian education is.

In public schools, the students give teachers money and the teachers give them high scores. This kind of culture was brought in Canada by those Chinese communism who immigrated from China. The Canadian diversity and multiculture are really excellent. The whole society has been diversified by communisms's corruption, dictatorship and crimes. There are so many Chinese criminals that Toronto police department has to open a Chinese version website.

Nowadays, you can even buy university diploma with money. For example, Canadian York Univeristy's Schulich business school's diploma can be bought by 20000 CAN because there are lots of Chinese who immgrate China's Cash for diploma to Canada and make Canada a part of communism union.

In Canada, the exam questions are always leaked out before the exam. For example, many teachers open the file and tells their students the questions of Canadian nations maths competitions of University of Waterloo before the exam.

Right now, Canada is even more corrupt than China and Canadians like to cover up everything because they really feel it a sham that they have so many bad immigrats and communisms in their country, and they regret that they made the immgration policy. They wish they had never allowed any immigrats but now, it is too late to change. They understand very clearly that current Brazil will be future Canada, and probably future Canada will be much worse than current Brazil because there are too many Asian communisms in Canada.

The good and capable people all go to the USA, and the bad leftover go to Canada, which looks like World's garbage can.

Punk was started by the Ramones, in New York. Even the Sex Pistols admitted that.

I highly doubt that state subsidies had much to do with the (so far minor) success of Metric or the New Pornographers. Especially subsidies for museums and such. And since they participate in the English-speaking North American music market, they would be at no disadvantage calling for subsidy relative to bands that started in Michigan or Florida.

Why can't these institutions flourish on the private contributions of rich Canadians the way US institutions benefit from the donations of rich Americans? I suspect there is quite a bit of "crowding out" of private contributions by public support.

I think this is always where it came from. Opera didn't start with state funding, it started and was kept afloart by rich patrons, as it would be now, in the absence of the state.

And anyway, perhaps crumbling is the natural state of all our institutions: there for us to kick but never strong enough to stop us kicking.

This is not inconsistent with the creativity of popular culture since the Old Establishment always subverts the New Establishment (not the other way round!).

One small example:

You have Bob Geldorf starting out in a punk rock band in the late 70s. At this stage he is Anti-Establishment.

Simply by surviving and becoming influential (show-business marriage, the Live Aid concerts in the 80s, campaigner against African poverty) he becomes New Establishment, wealthy rock royalty, hob-nobbing with the great and the good (and also the great and the evil – ie Tony Blair).

Eventually he will be absorbed into the Old Establishment – in evidence I would cite the recent photograph of Sir Bob Geldorf, Knight of the Realm, in WHITE TIE AND TAILS, medals and orders of chivalry pinned to his coat, attending a lavish banquet.

Ultimately the "Bob Geldorf Story" will be put in a museum (using "museum" in its widest context) and interpreted for visiting school parties (and studied for post-grad history students etc) as part of the national narrative (how "we" ended African poverty).

And to reply to James – I see no sign that the British class system is crumbling.

Admittedly, we had the advantage of having a crumbling class system to kick against. But you could also make the case that all sorts of creativity was enabled by student grants through art schools and livable-ish unemployment benefit.

Could we say that subsidies can be a good idea but should only been given to people who haven't achieved anything yet?

I hope so…and don't hesitate to link my blog or look into the subject matter if you do find it of interest heh heh…

http://gnosticminx.blogspot.com/2007/06/cormacs-coke-side-of-life.html

Seems to me you are describing a 'hedonic treadmill' — One can spend (or earn) a lot of money, but the absolute amount doesn't buy more happiness. One only feels good if one is doing just a bit better than the neighbors. In this case, Canada's neighbor to the South is the bride of hedonic happiness, while Canada is always the bridesmaid. The best C can hope for is a wedding crasher and a fling now and then.