I live in Southern California, US, but unlike most Southern California residents, I've never once set foot in Mexico (the closest I came was once, decades ago, when my parents and I were headed for either Sea World or the San Diego Zoo, and made a wrong turn that took us almost to the border crossing).
I've been to Canada four times. Twice, in childhood, day-trips to Estevan, SK, while visiting my dad's family in Crosby, ND. Once, a little over a decade ago, catching an Alaska cruise in Vancouver, BC. And once, last year, taking the train from Vancouver to Toronto, with a 2-day layover in Winnipeg, for my fall vacation.
My general impression is that the "Friendly Canadian" stereotype is true. And that as much as Amtrak needs friends in Congress, VIA Rail Canada is in far greater need of friends in Parliament.
And I really liked Winnipeg.
**********
Never been to the Philippines. I don't generally approve of capital punishment, (nor of retributive "justice" in general), but once every generation or so, somebody shows up who, simply by remaining alive, presents a danger to more people than can adequately be protected. And in the U.S., we have the Attainder and Ex Post Facto clauses in the Constitution (Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 3) that effectively make it impossible to execute such a person unless a death penalty law exists for the crime he or she was convicted of, at the time it was committed. But we need to have enough obstacles to capital punishment that it can never be imposed purely for the sake of vengeance. And certainly not simply for the sake of removing "troublemakers," let alone removing them extrajudicially.
As to recreational drugs, I'm with "rhubarbodendron"; I've never indulged in, or approved of, recreational pharmaceuticals of any kind. The very few times I've been even slightly buzzed (once or twice from strong prescriptions, when in extreme pain, and once from accidentally grabbing the wrong spoon, and downing a triple-dose of dextromethorphan cough syrup), I found the whole sensation utterly revolting.
But that said, I will note that of the four biggest "killer" drugs, i.e., the four that have, throughout human history, have caused the most morbidity, three of them are also the three most addictive, all three of them physiologically addictive, with both anecdotal evidence and a known mechanism for inducing tolerance, dependence, and withdrawal. The "odd man out" is cocaine (all its various forms taken together): very dangerous, with the potential to cause injury and death by itself, but not physiologically addictive. Out of the three most addictive drugs, two of them, surprisingly, are also the two biggest "gateway" drugs, the two drugs most likely to lead to other, unrelated drugs. The odd man out here is opiates, also considered as a family: they generally lead only to stronger opiates. Of the two biggest gateway drugs, both of which are highly addictive killers, both are perfectly legal in the U.S. and most of the rest of the world, so long as you've reached a certain specified age, both of them have made health claims, and both of them have been so completely socially acceptable that refusing, without obvious cause, to permit their addicts to indulge their addictions was considered socially unacceptable. One of them, nicotine, is slowly losing its social acceptability; the other, ethanol, still occasionally makes health claims.
My brother lived in Makati for a few years and in later in Santa Rosa - both not very far from Cavite City.
The commuter rail system is almost non-existent at this point, and in certain cases, they're even pulling up lengths of track.
)
Of course, it's entirely possible that with the Canadian being touted as luxury travel, that the food would be better than their average.
