[bootlegga]

I don't agree with giving natives free post-secondary education, but a deal's a deal. We made it and we should abide by it.

[Brenda]

bootlegga wrote:

I don't agree with giving natives free post-secondary education, but a deal's a deal. We made it and we should abide by it.

True, but...

We are paying carbon-taxes now, the economy is not going really well, the "other than Native Canadians" are cut... Why not Natives too?

I can imagine someone promised "the Canadian" that funding would not be cut, and people would pay less in taxes and so forth. I mean, a deal is a deal to everybody, and I think Natives shouldn't be treated like any other citizen/resident of this country. So that can go either way. Either we all get "free" post-secondary education, or no one does.

I agree education is VERY important... to everybody. Everybody should have the chance to educate themselves. How many Canadians cannot afford post-secondary education?

[Donny_Brasco]

PJB wrote:

I feel for the natives of this country but I will not ignore the needs of my own children. They should be allowed the same access without having to pay huge fees to get the same education that my tax dollars are paying for kids that feel that they, by race, are entitled to.

Well the French, (by race if you want to call it that) are entitled to the islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon which are just off the coast of Newfoundland.

Same thing, a treaty agreeing to certain terms and conditions, and like any other contract, legally binding.

"Race" is actually a scapegoat word for the ignorance Canada has to her own history.

If we were white or black or purple or Dutch the obligations Canada has because of the promises the Crown made in order to claim and settle this land is still the same.

I am all for equality, and that means we are treated as any other person would be if he/she was the rightful owner of property.

That means we uphold our obligations to share the land and abide by your laws, and you pay us for the land either by upholding your treaty obligations or by paying a fair market value.

We are open to changing the treaties to make them fairer, clearer and even obsolete if there is bilateral consultation and a fair deal is struck.

And you may claim that we never had a sense of ownership of the land that we lived on, and you may be right. However it was the Crown that affirmed our right to the property that we live on in the Royal Proclamation of 1763 – not so much to protect us and our land, but to reserve the right to claim this land for the Crown alone, so that no one else could claim the land before the British could.

Further to that the Royal Proclamation states that this land must be traded fairly:

Quote:

And whereas great Frauds and Abuses have been committed in purchasing Lands of the Indians, to the great Prejudice of our Interests. and to the great Dissatisfaction of the said Indians: In order, therefore, to prevent such Irregularities for the future, and to the end that the Indians may be convinced of our Justice and determined Resolution to remove all reasonable Cause of Discontent, We do, with the Advice of our Privy Council strictly enjoin and require, that no private Person do presume to make any purchase from the said Indians of any Lands reserved to the said Indians, within those parts of our Colonies where We have thought proper to allow Settlement: but that, if at any Time any of the Said Indians should be inclined to dispose of the said Lands, the same shall be Purchased only for Us, in our Name, at some public Meeting or Assembly of the said Indians, to be held for that Purpose by the Governor or Commander in Chief of our Colony respectively within which they shall lie: and in case they shall lie within the limits of any Proprietary Government, they shall be purchased only for the Use and in the name of such Proprietaries, conformable to such Directions and Instructions as We or they shall think proper to give for that Purpose: And we do, by the Advice of our Privy Council, declare and enjoin, that the Trade with the said Indians shall be free and open to all our Subjects whatever, provided that every Person who may incline to Trade with the said Indians do take out a Licence for carrying on such Trade from the Governor or Commander in Chief of any of our Colonies respectively where such Person shall reside, and also give Security to observe such Regulations as We shall at any Time think fit, by ourselves or by our Commissaries to be appointed for this Purpose, to direct and appoint for the Benefit of the said Trade:

So we are protected under your own laws and the land covered under the Royal Proclamation must be fairly traded - and that is your obligation.

And once again we could end up in court and leave it to judges to decide, however when that decision is made there is no turning back. Our batting average has been good; we have many, many good lawyers and cash to back up our rights.

Can you really afford to lose in court, or can we come to some other settlement?

[Donny_Brasco]

Brenda wrote:

bootlegga wrote:

I don't agree with giving natives free post-secondary education, but a deal's a deal. We made it and we should abide by it.

True, but...

We are paying carbon-taxes now, the economy is not going really well, the "other than Native Canadians" are cut... Why not Natives too?

I can imagine someone promised "the Canadian" that funding would not be cut, and people would pay less in taxes and so forth. I mean, a deal is a deal to everybody, and I think Natives shouldn't be treated like any other citizen/resident of this country. So that can go either way. Either we all get "free" post-secondary education, or no one does.

I agree education is VERY important... to everybody. Everybody should have the chance to educate themselves. How many Canadians cannot afford post-secondary education?

How about considering this sort of education "pre-paid" to your grandparents and great grandparents by my people, in exchange they got to build this great country together for you and I.

That’s the nice version, forget that our people were starved and coerced into signing AND WE STILL CAN'T GET YOU TO UPHOLD YOUR END OF THE DEAL.

Now how ironic is that?

[Mustang1]

Brenda wrote:

I can imagine someone promised "the Canadian" that funding would not be cut, and people would pay less in taxes and so forth. I mean, a deal is a deal to everybody, and I think Natives shouldn't be treated like any other citizen/resident of this country. So that can go either way. Either we all get "free" post-secondary education, or no one does.

I agree education is VERY important... to everybody. Everybody should have the chance to educate themselves. How many Canadians cannot afford post-secondary education?

I agree with you - it's too bad that some people in this great country demand special treatment (and it's usually monetary) for services that others are expected to deal with themselves. It's victimization at its finest and its marred in historical issues that many, including women, Irish, Blacks, Catholics, Protestants and Jews have had to overcome and have overcome. History is just that sometimes and eventually the victim gravy train needs to come to a halt.

[westmanguy]

Okay here's the thing, we uphold the treaties, okay, I understand that now.

But post secondary education for natives is a matter of public policy, not a treaty right.

Therefor we should only uphold the basics we own to the Natives under the treaties.

Cut all post secondary funding to natives.

You know, I had an older friend, who was in a low income household, abusive father, and he was white. But he worked hard in school, and is very intelligent. Guess what? He graduated magna cum laude, but he couldn't afford to take education in university, so now he's working at a gas station, and hopes to have enough $ to get in to a trades college program eventually.

It's is NOT just Natives who suffer. Help ALL low income Canadians.

Because it gets a little annoying seeing a native in my community who did piss all during school, who has drug addictions, etc. getting a free ride into university, when my white low income friend is stuck with piss all.

[Brenda]

Donny_Brasco wrote:

Brenda wrote:

bootlegga wrote:

I don't agree with giving natives free post-secondary education, but a deal's a deal. We made it and we should abide by it.

True, but...

We are paying carbon-taxes now, the economy is not going really well, the "other than Native Canadians" are cut... Why not Natives too?

I can imagine someone promised "the Canadian" that funding would not be cut, and people would pay less in taxes and so forth. I mean, a deal is a deal to everybody, and I think Natives shouldn't be treated like any other citizen/resident of this country. So that can go either way. Either we all get "free" post-secondary education, or no one does.

I agree education is VERY important... to everybody. Everybody should have the chance to educate themselves. How many Canadians cannot afford post-secondary education?

How about considering this sort of education "pre-paid" to your grandparents and great grandparents by my people, in exchange they got to build this great country together for you and I.

That’s the nice version, forget that our people were starved and coerced into signing AND WE STILL CAN'T GET YOU TO UPHOLD YOUR END OF THE DEAL.

Now how ironic is that?

Well, I guess we have a different view there...

You can't dwell on history forever. Natives can't, Quebecers can't, Jews in Europe can't. There is a time to move on. Maybe that time has come. Time changes everything.

I suggest the "poor Natives" that dwell on the past kick themselves in the ass, get a scolarship or sponsoring (like the "other" Canadians" have to), or work their way through college, OR we all get a government sponsoring like the Natives do now.

"YOUR" people... You are discriminating... discriminating yourself. I think it is time to stop it.

[Gunnair]

Donny_Brasco wrote:

Brenda wrote:

bootlegga wrote:

I don't agree with giving natives free post-secondary education, but a deal's a deal. We made it and we should abide by it.

True, but...

We are paying carbon-taxes now, the economy is not going really well, the "other than Native Canadians" are cut... Why not Natives too?

I can imagine someone promised "the Canadian" that funding would not be cut, and people would pay less in taxes and so forth. I mean, a deal is a deal to everybody, and I think Natives shouldn't be treated like any other citizen/resident of this country. So that can go either way. Either we all get "free" post-secondary education, or no one does.

I agree education is VERY important... to everybody. Everybody should have the chance to educate themselves. How many Canadians cannot afford post-secondary education?

How about considering this sort of education "pre-paid" to your grandparents and great grandparents by my people, in exchange they got to build this great country together for you and I.

That’s the nice version, forget that our people were starved and coerced into signing AND WE STILL CAN'T GET YOU TO UPHOLD YOUR END OF THE DEAL.

Now how ironic is that?

As I said earlier - your people were conquered. Don't expect fairness. I know mine didn't at the hands of the English, nor did Brenda's at the hands of the French.

The sooner you accept the history and end the constant wallowing in self-pity the better.

Sorry to say it, but the culture of victemhood has done absolutley nothing for the natives. Your poor because you choose to live on the reserves in poverty as opposed to leaving and moving to more prosperous regions.

[Gunnair]

lily wrote:

Quote:

As I said earlier - your people were conquered. Don't expect fairness.

They expected fairness because "we" promised it.

At the time, of course. Fairness hasn't been forthcoming since, and shouldn't really be expected. Signatories said what they needed to in the treaties to convince the natives to sign on and move to the reservations in order to avoid a costly and bloody war that would ultimately have exterminated the culture.

At the same time, let's be brutaly honest here and pose the question - should we continue to be obligated to treaties that were signed over a century or more ago by governments that had absolutley no clue how they would be both percieved or implemented in the 21st century? As well, are these treaties honestly benefiting the natives? Are they any better off now than say, 10, 20, 50, or 100 years ago or are we (meaning all - natives and government) simply perpetuating the situation that keeps them in poverty?

There was a recent series of articles in the local paper discussing the issue of housing in a poor coastal community. Multi-families living in run down shacks, infested with mold, in a poor community with minimal employment or potential. I'm asking myself, why stay? There is nothing there, if any potential exists, it doesn't seem to have been tapped or developed - the inhabitents are simply paid to stay and live in poverty with a nexpectation that the government will build them new houses every few years because no one has the ability, and I might even add, desire to maintain what they have.

What are we doing with these people?

[TattoodGirl]

Sorry to burst everyones bubble, but I didnt get free education nor do many. Only a few each year do...I paid for every penny of my degree and I am paying every penny of my Masters. No student Loans no band funding.

I did get alot of scholarships after my first year, but it still doesnt cover all costs.

[Gunnair]

lily wrote:

Are you asking if we need to honour treaties signed in good faith?

If so, then the answer is yes.

Actually, I'm asking more generally, what we are accomplishing with policies in general since I've seen no change. Why would we continue to throw good money at bad policies?

[Donny_Brasco]

Gunnair wrote:

As I said earlier - your people were conquered. Don't expect fairness. I know mine didn't at the hands of the English, nor did Brenda's at the hands of the French.

The sooner you accept the history and end the constant wallowing in self-pity the better.

Sorry to say it, but the culture of victemhood has done absolutley nothing for the natives. Your poor because you choose to live on the reserves in poverty as opposed to leaving and moving to more prosperous regions.

So if you had any say in it you would go to court and tell the judge that we were conquered, despite all the agreements, legal evidence and case law that states otherwise?

That’s good, because instead of hiring $500/hour lawyers we can save some money and get a first year law student to beat that argument in court.

Thanks for your opinion.

[Donny_Brasco]

Gunnair wrote:

lily wrote:

Quote:

As I said earlier - your people were conquered. Don't expect fairness.

They expected fairness because "we" promised it.

At the time, of course. Fairness hasn't been forthcoming since, and shouldn't really be expected. Signatories said what they needed to in the treaties to convince the natives to sign on and move to the reservations in order to avoid a costly and bloody war that would ultimately have exterminated the culture.

At the same time, let's be brutaly honest here and pose the question - should we continue to be obligated to treaties that were signed over a century or more ago by governments that had absolutley no clue how they would be both percieved or implemented in the 21st century? As well, are these treaties honestly benefiting the natives? Are they any better off now than say, 10, 20, 50, or 100 years ago or are we (meaning all - natives and government) simply perpetuating the situation that keeps them in poverty?

There was a recent series of articles in the local paper discussing the issue of housing in a poor coastal community. Multi-families living in run down shacks, infested with mold, in a poor community with minimal employment or potential. I'm asking myself, why stay? There is nothing there, if any potential exists, it doesn't seem to have been tapped or developed - the inhabitents are simply paid to stay and live in poverty with a nexpectation that the government will build them new houses every few years because no one has the ability, and I might even add, desire to maintain what they have.

What are we doing with these people?

We are open to renegotiate if you are willing to pay fair market value. Then we have no claim at all.

[BartSimpson]

Donny_Brasco wrote:

We are open to renegotiate if you are willing to pay fair market value. Then we have no claim at all.

If you people got paid everything you asked for today it wouldn't be enough. You'd be back with your hands out and making demands the next day after the check was cashed.

[Donny_Brasco]

BartSimpson wrote:

Donny_Brasco wrote:

We are open to renegotiate if you are willing to pay fair market value. Then we have no claim at all.

If you people got paid everything you asked for today it wouldn't be enough. You'd be back with your hands out and making demands the next day after the check was cashed.

And then you could say "no".