SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
SI - Site Forums : Silicon Investor - Welcome New SI Members!
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: laura_bush who wrote (20508)3/17/2004 8:44:28 AM
From: Original Mad Dog  Read Replies (1) of 32873
 
The linked posts in question (which I wrote) correct ridiculous factual inaccuracies by a poster. The TOU's do not prohibit that.

In this case, the poster suggested that because Canadian immigration law only allowed Asians to emigrate to Canada during the 1990's if they had a million dollars, while U.S. law was purportedly looser, U.S. workers were being hurt. The poster specifically cited Vancouver as a place that Asians (Chinese and Indians) could get in only if they had a million dollars. That's preposterous. Nearly half a million Asians -- most Chinese and Indian -- live in Vancouver, and most of them got in under a point system which I described in detail in the post and which does not require you to have any money. The point system rewards education, work experience, and learning Canada's two languages, among other things.

The same poster was at it again later in the evening, claiming the WTO never blocked Bush's steel tariffs. In fact the Bush tariffs (something Bush did which I disagree with, BTW) were blocked by the WTO last July, and the ruling was upheld on appeal in December. Retaliatory sanctions in the billions of dollars were announced before Bush backed down and lifted the tariffs. SI readers who don't follow international trade disputes might read that poster's posts and actually be tempted to believe them, which in the end only harms the credibility of SI as a place with knowledgable posters making informative comments about economic and other issues.

Incidentally, the first set of posts weren't about Bush at all (though one did ask what Kerry's position was on immigration). The WTO post didn't say anything about Bush other than that his attempt to impose tariffs was overruled by the WTO.

The posts are an attempt to improve SI by exposing a penchant by some to just make stuff up to support their political agenda (and in this case I believe the posts being challenged are also being made to support a personal animus toward Asians, though that is just my opinion based on other comments that poster has made about people of Asian origin). Are you suggesting that the poster being "attacked" (the word "challenged" fits better) was correct in her original claims? Does Canada exclude Asians from emigrating their unless they have a million dollars? Did the WTO say Bush's steel tariffs were ok by them? And which specific paragraph of the TOU were violated by the posts in question?
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News