Comments by AP_YYZ

Listen, if we still, in this day and age have spy scandals (most recent Canada Russia), then we seem to still need visas - from tracking perspective and a somewhat of an attempt to filter out future illegal immigrants and/or terrorists (tho the latter one seems to make less sense as those with evil intent always somehow find a way in). I eagerly await the changes to the current behemoth system, unyielding, inflexible, costly.... and ineffective. One thing I'd like to see is ti go back to NO visas to Canadian permanent residents, not just citizens (or for that matter the equivalent status holders in other countries, where being a citizen doesnt require a visa to the US).
My sister was denied visitor visa when she was 16 and a permanent resident in Canada. The grounds? He figured that because we lived in the US for 11 years, my sister was so dying to go back and live there again that she was willing to do so illegally. But officer, she is an honor roll student who is planning to go to university, she will be a citizen in 3 years, and she has no one there at all... She really has no reason to leave everything in Canada and stay in the US. His answer: no, she'll get a black market job, and I really think she has enough friends to support her there, I am confident she won't be coming back to Canada. Visa denied.
Now, you tell me what did they accomplish, except lost revenue on plane tickets and a 16 year old shopping let loose to do shopping in NYC.

I want to expand on the polygamy a little especially in the answer to Mikaeel6. If Islam allowed multiple husbands to one wife I could see your argument, but it does not, so it is by definition not extending equal rights in marriage. Outside of Islam, I would dare anyone to find even one case of female centric polygamous relationship to 10 male centric. Polygamy has never been and never will be about equality. I reject polygamy as a viable option to argue along the same lines as gay marriage.

Good job NY. For those who have religious objections, maybe this video will help in making you see things from a different perspective. http://www.itgetsbetter.org/video/entry/4915/

For those who bring polygamy out - polygamy historically has been about subjugation of women and in a bureaucratic sense would bring chaos to tax and insurance codes that could put everyone else at a disadvantage(whereas gay marriage is still a union of 2 people just not opposite sex).

For those who bring out bestiality - that would plainly be a marriage not entered into with consent from both parties - so no go folks.

Seriously, the Russians are just 1 pound behind Americans in spending on foreign hotels. How does that happen? The rich don't seem like the type that would use hotels.com and the poor - well some of them earn less than $300 (US) per month. There is no middle class in Russia - you know the demographic that would actually use hotels.com and other online booking sites to get their hotels. Just expressing my confusion, that's all.

Overall, I agree with the post's intent that more resources and training is needed to address the unemployed - rather than making them more and more marginalized.
However, there is one gripe I have. "they may be concerned, not unreasonably, that a long duration of employment has eroded a worker's skills and work discipline"
First, surely you mean long duration of UNemployment.
Second, I disagree with the use of the workd "not unreasonably". In fact, I would argue this is unfounded. Think about maternity leaves. Yes, in the US it is what, 3 months if one is lucky. But in Canada it is a full year - 52 weeks. And somehow we have not seen the dumbing down of the female workers over that time. I then some European countries go up to as much as 2 years. Please don't make it sound like women who temporarily leave "office space" are now somehow less smart than before.
Additionally, what about those who are taking up new courses, education - MBA? What if you learned a new language? What if you volunteered during disaster relief or in a thirld world country? I know someone who got laid off and went to clean up New Orleans after Katrina for three months. Technically, this falls under the "unemployed, no matter what the reason is" and is it the right move for an employer to assume these candidates are less than perfect now?
Employers need to be educated that not being employed does not mean you have suddenly become as dumb as nails.

Wasn't there a special report some time back about the same thing? or am I thinking different magazine (McLeans?) How the future of suburban shopping is the "fake" downtown like areas transplanted from Europe. I.e. set up a boutique type of setting with walking/cycling paths, small shops, rest areas, fountains - that kind of stuff. So that it resembles the old-towns of Europe.
Now that would be fun.

I disagree with the statement that in North America "the tax is disregarded in the calculation". I have had numerous discussions, and sometimes arguments with former waiters, who insist that tip should be on the total, inclusive of taxes. I feel this is a rip off and unfair. Tax in no way should be part of the calculation - but the reality is that it is a growing trend even in North America that waiters DO expect to be tipped on the final total.

What's more, there are these new gadgets - portable credit card swiping machines. Conveniently, the waiter will bring it to your table, so that they swipe the card, punch in the tip, print the receipt, you sign, and the card never leaves you sight. Great right? Well when you take a look at the "tip" options, you can choose to leave a specific amount "$$" or a percentage "%". Hit "%" and 9 out of 10 times the calculation will be made on the final total - i.e. inclusive of taxes! Sneaky and totally underhanded.

And then there is Miami, where the "tip" is already included when the bill is brought - but no one bothers to tell you - AND there is still a line left for "tip amount". I barely escaped writing in an amount there, in effect I would be leaving something like 30%. Whew.

I had a fight with my friend once because I was traveling on the standby staff ticket (parents) and she was on a regularly purchased one. When the flight was overbooked, I knew I was chopped liver and wasn't getting on. That I would have to show up tomorrow again, after spending the night on my own. When they asked for volunteers, I told my friend this would be perfect: she would get a room paid for, I will stay there too and we both would be on the flight tomorrow and have one more day added to vacation. She declined. I didn't talk to her for a week. (I forgave her though, later)

I don't believe that Virgin has the right to withhold the payments. Wait until the inquiry is over and then sue for damages separately. How can Virgin decide that this is how much LHR owes them and to what extent LHR was responsible for the chaos? They can't.

I found that consolidated sights give me reminders of what options are out there - but I rarely get better fares on THEIR sites than on the airlines directly. I actually frequently wondered how long it will be before these sites start falling off the face of the earth.

yeah, I have gotten used to paying extra for more leg room - or grinding my teeth during the flight if I didn't. That's unfortunate for me, but I agree - if we want the obese passengers to pay extra (buy a seat) or overweight luggage to be charged extra - then this is what the tall people have to put up with as well. BTW, Dignx, when I booked the latest flight in the exit row I WAS asked if I was able bodied enough - and they still never book anyone with infant, or under the age of 12, or handicapped there - even if you want to pay.

Liquids. Had to fight to keep baby sunscreen in the carry-on baby diaper bag - 110 mls (only 10mls over the limit) - got the superviser to nod approval though! Family doctor said he will write a note that it is "essential medication" for my red-headed, pale-skinned half irish toddler for next travel... Considering that there are (rightly) so many exclusions to the liquids rule, this can be so easy for real terrorists to circumvent. Why keep it???

Entertaining, that story is. What I found odd in that story is that he/she failed to get the attention of flight attendants. I hear of lots of stories where travellers inconvenienced by a crying baby or a drunk passenger ARE offered an upgrade to business/first at no cost - by attendants. I would even tell them all I need is the seat there, not the food or the other perks. At the very least I would write a letter afterwards to the airline - possibly getting an upgrade voucher for future use.

Pretty funny, and a good add Lafayette.
I am posting this on Facebook.

What an enjoyable article. I wish I was sitting in a big comfy chair in front of a fireplace reading it marvelling at the "mysterious" North Korea and wondering if it was like that with Soviet Union in the 80s when and where I grew up.

or bring a bottle of hot sauce on the plane (under 100mls of course :)) and douze the food with it. Worked for us!

whaaat? This is a total spin. Typical of companies that have a responsibility to the public to turn a small item like this into a big achievement. Even if passed on, this equates to 2% savings on $200 ticket - which the minimum nowadays, with international fares making this a fraction of a percent savings. Imagine Pepsi announced their 12pks will now be 8 cents cheaper - and no one is even sure that the retailers will pass it on to the shoppers. We WOULD mock them, not applaud them!

Do any of the current mayoral candidates have a connection to GTAA? Smacks of some political slant so someone can put it on their resume - in my eyes.

Looks like Porter did the right thing and refunded the money.

But there is no winning in situations like this, eh? Sounds like someone will always be inconvenienced - either the obese passenger or the person sitting next to them.

Still thanks for posting - now I know what my options are should I find myself next to 1.5 persons on a plane.

I kind of always wanted to do this but never had the chops. and yeah, I do value time and convenience. I recently returned from a leisure trip to Europe and we actually laughed at home when I told my family what I was asked. Where are you coming from - Amsterdam - and what did you do there - sightsee - where else did you go - Belgium and Luxembourg - and what did you do there - sightsee. What did this achieve, nothing! but it took 3 minutes tops and I was out of the airport 2 minutes later (no checked baggage baby!)

Maybe I don't travel much, but I was surprised to see that Schiphol has x-ray machines only in front of the gates. I think that's awesome. As it means you can drink your water while lounging around the retail area (not chuck it 2 hrs before just to get into the secure zone) and then everyone is lined up for the same flight, not some for a flight that leaves in 30 mins and others that leave in 2 hrs. (In fact in Toronto, frequently you will be turned away from the x-ray line if you arrive too early!)
When I was leaving I was amazed and sad that I didn't have enough time to go through this airport. Lady playing on a piano. Lounge with some funky chairs and TVs. Multitude of fine shops, museum related, food related, genever related.