Shared publicly  - 
I've been on Google+ since July 17/11, less than a month after the beta start. Since then, I've encountered a lot of other Canadians on G+. All of us are promoting G+ to some degree. I have promoted G+ both on line and at a personal level since the inception, as have many other Canadians.

I haven't seen any effort by Canadians to segregate ourselves into a 'Canadian' part of G+, as we don't see ourselves as separate from the other members. One of the big attractions of G+ is that we are grouped by interests, not by geography.

Recently, Google made a big deal out of Obama starring in a Google organised, set up, financed and promoted ' Hangout' that was actually a campaign ad for Obama. What many here don't know, is that the Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, has been a member of Google + since before July 24, 2011, early beta.

For those of you that don't follow Canada, Mr. Harper is seen as leading the most successful country in the G7 or G20 in surviving the current major depression largely caused by Obama's policies. We in Canada have prudent fiscal polices, we regulate our banks to prevent the thievery common in the US, we have largely not had any housing crisis, (though the downturn has caused some uncertainties), and we have not had the massive un-employment seen in the US.

One of the recurring themes of being Canadian, is that we tend not to self-promote, as we come from a more British background, and tend to be a bit more reserved. What this has gotten us is a Google imposed, top down 'Canada' section run by a new Canadian whose main credentials seem to be marketing skills and knowing the 'right' people, and as evidenced by posts here on G+, doesn't even live in Canada any more.

Google should read up on the War of 1812.
miri dunn's profile photoSandra Vaughan's profile photoIan Vaughan's profile photoJimmy Brokaw (Hedgie)'s profile photo
Hi Ian.
I did not know Harper was on here, indeed. But not a huge fan of his, at any rate. I can certainly see what people made a deal out of a hangout with Obama. It is exciting and very forward thinking for a world leader of his stature to lead the way in using social media. I am not sure how you concluded that the US is suffering from Obama's policies. Obama is still trying to clean up the mess from previous president, with the GOP blocking his every effort even when it is in their own best interests. Even with the constant obstacle, however, he has already done more for social programs and individuals like Vets than his predecessors. There is a good website you might check called "What has Obama done for us so far?" ... point form clicks of the MANY great tings he has done.

ANyway- your email said something about Canadian Google - and I am not sure what that means or refers to. I don't wish to debate politics as we are not likely to see eye to eye but I would like to know about this "canadian google" thing and the top town etc
+Ian Vaughan Why not Start a New Circle Yourself and Share according as you then desire. Canada has a lot of great Musicians, and a lot more going for it. XLNT 2012 2 U and Urs my G+ Neighbor. "_)
What? They let CANADIANS on G+?

But seriously, for someone from a nation known for not self-promoting, I'd check my facts before self-promoting. According to Wikipedia, Canada's unemployment rate is 8.6%, whereas the US has a virtually identical 8.5%. Our economies are very closely linked, and are far more complex and intertwined than they may appear at first.

Also, you can't believe everything you read in the news.
He is correct that we did not suffer the same fall out of a mortgage bubble, economic disaster etc-- we are very strong

and it has everything to do with regulations
Are you basing that off your experiences in Canada compared to media reports of what the US is like?
But the media does. All I'm suggesting is that using the same source, I find that the two countries which share a large border and have intertwined economies have virtually identical unemployment rates. I'll readily agree that Canadians, like Americans, have been bombarded with news articles about how bad unemployment is in America. But that's not the same thing as saying the United States has horrible unemployment with Canada has remained unscathed.
I'm saying there is a fundamental difference in the way the numbers are generated. the Media is supporting the White House, and up here the media hates our government, so the numbers are skewed down in the US, and up in Canada.
Um, okay. So, uh, do you have a source for unemployment data that you trust? Because my numbers originate from the US government and the Canadian government websites. Media issues aside, I don't think your government hates itself enough to skew data to make itself look bad.
Okay, good thing I'm not using birth/date stats.

Once again, have you got any sources that show any appreciable difference between US and Canadian unemployment rates this decade?
we used to have a much higher rate than the US for years, until we elected a Conservative government, then the numbers changed.
I `m at work, I`ll look for some good numbers for you when I get home.
Ian asked me to post to let you all know that, as he predicted, Google has blocked him from posting.
Incidentally, I'm posting again, I've figured out how to flush the captcha queue.
Still lacking any attempt to compare US and Canadian unemployment numbers using equivilent formulas...
+Jimmy Brokaw These articles show why. There is no smoke and mirrors in our numbers, so we don't have anything but the real numbers to show. Besides, there is little or no interest in comparing the numbers, unless one is a sycophant of Obamas, and desperate to make the real numbers look better....
I strongly disagree. You stated that the US has high unemployment but Canada does not. I disagreed and posted numbers. You provided nontraditional formulas for calculating US unemployment but refused to apply the same formulas to Canada, and made unfounded accusations that all US numbers are faked but all Canadian numbers are honest. Frankly, you're coming off a little nationalistic and xenophobic. If you can't produce numbers showing higher unemployment in the US using consistent formulas, you should retract your statements about the differences in unemployment rates. If you can, I'll retract mine. But saying that you have no interest in looking at numbers to defend you claim?
Those are very different formulas. You can't compare apples to oranges. Pick a formula and stick to it.
Huh? You really can't see that using different methods to estimate unemployment is unfair? If you insist on using standard formulations for Canadian unemployment but refuse to use the same formula for American unemployment, then I cannot see a resolution to this debate. You are apparently unable or unwilling to involve actual statistics or facts in your logic.
The formulas don't have kids to feed. The issue is unemployment. Official numbers reflect reality, in that they represent the numbers as considered important by the jurisdiction issuing them, a sort of social trimming.
Exactly. And you're using a government source for Canada and an anti-government source for the US. There are many differences between the two formulas, but here's an important specific one: the US number you quote counts part time workers who want full time work as unemployed, but the Canada number you quote counts "any type of employment" as employed.

If you were to measure the US and Canadian unemployment the same way, you wouldn't see a significant difference.
Add a comment...