Comments on: Canada: “Man ordered to pay panhandler $8,000 for discrimination”

By: lucky

lucky — Sat, 10 Aug 2013 20:15:48 +0000

Whar an outrage. The statement caused no harm to the derelict because it was not made to the person. The patrons if that liquor store should take their business elsewhere.

By: Bob Lipton

Bob Lipton — Fri, 09 Aug 2013 22:19:31 +0000

By showing it to the panhandler, was not the store operator repeating this vile statement and should be held to the same standard of behavior and penalty?

Bob

By: Hugo S. Cunningham

Hugo S. Cunningham — Fri, 09 Aug 2013 18:21:42 +0000

Another illustration why Canada needs the USA’s First Amendment, also why government monopolies are often a bad idea.

If Quebec’s retail liquor trade were not a government monopoly, the store would face a boycott by the non-bum elements of the population. As a monopoly with civil-service-protected employees, however, they can thumb their noses at the community.