Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

TheSalmonMousse

Members
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TheSalmonMousse

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

341 profile views
  1. Sorry to revive this. Last year I decided to go with Scotia and pushed for the VISA Infinite Momentum, following some of the advice posted here. I was pleased when I was granted the first year at no fee with an unofficial understanding with the advisor that the fee would also be waived in subsequent years as long as he was still working there. It's now 1 year later and I'm told that 1 year free of charge is all he could do. Seems we didn't have an understanding after all. Was wondering if those that got the Infinite Momentum were able to get if free of charge for more than 1 year.
  2. Finalement, is semblerait que le Surface Pro est accepté. J'ai communiqué avec la responsable des dossiers étudiants de première et elle m'a indiqué que l'ordinateur est conforme tant qu'il ait les prérequis indiqués par Examsoft: Mac : https://examsoft.force.com/emcommunity/s/article/Examplify-Minimum-System-Requirements-for-Mac-OS-X PC : https://examsoft.force.com/emcommunity/s/article/Examplify-Minimum-System-Requirements-for-Windows C'est un peu tard, mais si jamais ça peut aider quelqu'un qui n'a pas encore son laptop...
  3. Pourtant, le site d'Examsoft indique spécifiquement que les Surface Pro sont compatibles : https://examsoft.com/dotnet/documents/sitehelp/minspecs.aspx Dommage que tous les convertibles soient exclus, j'aurais aimé avoir l'option d'utiliser un stylet en mode tablette. J'imagines qu'on peut toujours avoir une tablette un plus d'un laptop conforme aux exigences... D'ailleurs, ce système de prise de notes avec iPad, Notability et OneNote semble pas mal:
  4. Ah super, merci! Sais-tu si c'est mieux d'avoir un écran plus large? Le PC que j'ai est un ultraportable et n'a qu'un écran assez petit (13po).
  5. I disagree, I can think of some conservative thinkers that uphold exactly this position. I stated that this is a conservative position and did not make the blanket statement that all conservatives necessarily hold this point of view. In the same way, I'm sure everyone here is also aware that left-right is a spectrum and not some binary state and thus do not think that all progressives think government is the solution to everything all the time. That said, I agree with what I think is the general sentiment of your post: people generally shouldn't be pigeonholed if you want productive debate. In that same spirit, I think it's important to assume that everyone here is expressing their opinions in good faith. I'd be very hesitant to ascribe any kind of nefarious motive (guilt-tripping, etc.) to someone just because they are strongly expressing opposing views. I'd rather like to think that people engage in debate not to pontificate, but to refine their own positions/ideas and possibly learn something new. I think debate is an important part of democratic life and (in addition to life experience, individual perspective and the other elements you mentioned) should be valued and encouraged despite the frictions it engenders on occasion.
  6. Pour les étudiants commançant en 2è année (première de doctorat) le programme recommande l'achat d'un Mac. Je me demandais si c'est faisable d'y aller avec un PC ou est-ce que les problèmes de compatibilité avec Examsoft sont très problématiques. Merci!
  7. Couldn't agree more with this. I'd also add that the belief that social problems are best addressed by private institutions/charities/initiatives is a conservative position. So if you're voting conservative mainly because of fiscal issues and you also think that social issues are not best addressed by government, then you're not really socially progressive.
  8. I agree, complete deregulation makes no sense and almost no one is arguing for that I think. The important issue is excessive intervention by the AMA who, under the pretext of maintaining quality training, have been unduly limiting the amount of new doctors being trained (there's a Forbes on this topic: https://www.forbes.com/2009/08/25/american-medical-association-opinions-columnists-shikha-dalmia.html#7620a13a42f2). There's an often made argument that Canadian earnings are justified in that they loosely follow US earnings, which are presumed to be market-based. The point I'm making is that the whole argument falls apart when you consider that the American market is far from free since supply is essentially controlled by the AMA. So it seems to me you'd need to invoke other reasons than the market to justify physicians' earnings.
  9. Right, except it isn't exactly a free market in the US if supply (of doctors) is artificially limited by the state, essentially by limiting the number of spots in residency and blocking the opening of new medical schools. So a proper free market should drive physicians' wages down if it weren't for state intervention and lobbying by the AMA. At lest that's the Milton Friedman argument, which I think makes a lot of sense.
  10. I don't see why you couldn't compare, unless you're implying physicians are just more efficient than others...? $/act is just an alternative way of determining compensation ; if a bricklayer charged per brick layed he'd also be doing a high volume of acts in a day's work. In the end, wouldn't you agree that the market determines compensation, whether it's $/act or salary?
  11. I want to say something in defense of fishing expeditions, being that I'm somewhat of a fisherman myself. I think the main issue with them is the abundance of poorly conceived experiments and misuse of statistics . That criticism is welcome and necessary when it's deserved. Unfortunately, I've found that a lot of the criticism I've faced or been privy to all too often come from a more ideological place. I once heard a prof outright question the usefulness of screens and large-scale studies as he believed any results from these experiments could (and thus should!) be obtained through traditional reductionist hypothesis-driven methods. I personally could not write a paper in way you prescribe. Not that it's not a perfectly valid approach, but I feel it leaves too little room for serendipity. What happens when your results bring you somewhere you hadn't anticipated? Also, there's the very real - and unfortunate - problem of what do you do with negative results.
  12. Don't you think this applies to physicians too then? If the physician is claiming competitive compensation based on the current market, shouldn't the Hydro One exec be able to claim equivalent compensation to his peers in the private sector? I've worked in biomedical research in the public sector (academia). I definitely think most profs/PIs definitely earn their pay. Especially considering what they have to get through in order to get a position : increasingly long PhD and post-doc (more often post-docs) with no guarantee of a position down the road. No truck load of slackers in this sector : it's publish or perish, with a large majority in the latter category. I agree with you that an efficient public sector should be a priority and that some salaries are excessive. On the other hand, indiscriminate cutbacks create a culture where people are overworked and the means to provide adequate services are lacking. This then heightens the perception that government is inefficient (and that people are not doing their jobs or are lazy/overpaid). If you're of a cynical bent, you might even argue that conservatives enact these indiscriminate cutbacks because they know this plays into their hands all too well...
  13. In Quebec, Laval and Montreal have specific categories for PhD grads. Your GPA can be a bit lower than other groups but I think publications and research experience need to be competitive. Out of province spots are quite limited though in both cases.
  14. I have a couple questions for you right-leaning folks: I often hear this idea that higher taxes hinder industry. While it seems obvious to me that extremely high taxes will have that effect, it's much less clear that there would be a negative impact following slight or moderate increases. Is there any clear evidence that moderate tax increases directly stifle growth? Also, aren't there numerous counter-examples of periods of sustained growth where taxes were also much higher (for instance the 50s in the US - income tax rates above 90% for top bracket)? I'm also curious to know if you think that market conditions (supply and demand) provide an adequate justification of physicians' earnings? I'm not trying to make any point here, just genuinely interested in hearing your ideas.
  15. So where do you get the idea that Quebec is always complaining if not from Canadian media?
×
×
  • Create New...