There's no such thing as a "pure" version of French. Modern French, though primarily derived from Parision, is a mélange of features from different areas of France. Where words start ép-, éc- etc, that's a corruption of Latin sp-, sc-, and while the Celtic and Germanic tribes could say that, the Basques (in the South, a long way from Paris) couldn't; "c'est à moi" is thought to be a Celtic pattern; the name "France" comes from the Germanic people "the Franks" who originally lived in most of Northern France. And all of this was just "impure Latin".

The difference between Québuécois is simply that Québuécois is derived from a different mixture of regional dialects, as there were very few Parisians among the original settlers. Neither is more "pure", neither is more "cultured", neither is more "intelligent". At the end of the day, both are just "how people speak".

They've already migrated away from this, and most people call it "mél", which is more like "mail" than "email". It also works great in email signatures, as they now typically go:
Tél: +33 1.23.45.67
Mél: nom@addresse.fr

This is a good example of borrowing, because it's been nativised. The "e" bit didn't work in French, so they got rid of it. Besides, email and courriel both give precedence to mail, and email is now the norm, with paper mail being the exception. Having email no longer subservient to postal mail as a concept makes a great deal of sense.

If you ever do, please say hello to President Jonah for me.

I used to live in Spain, right next to the French border. Lots of the products on the supermarket shelves were labelled in Spanish and Portuguese. Because it's easier for them to print one set of packaging and distribute it everywhere than produce different packs. Many of the products available in the UK have at least one language, quite often things like Dutch or Danish, which are relatively close by and have a small consumer base. Galaxy chocolates often have Arabic on them. There is even a couple of supermarket chains whose own brand products carry half the languages of the EU.

The rest of the world is used to this... calm down, North America.

So what? Wherever you live, you interact more with people in your area than people outside it. There's 200km between Montréal and Ottawa. There's plenty of places in the world where you can cross an entire country in 200km and encounter 3 or more languages in the process.

As a citizen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland domiciled in Scotland, I never legislate on Canadian language matters, nor do I have to deal with it.

Yeah, but see, here you aren't just expressing an opinion, you're expressing your opinion as unquestionable truth. There is a massive difference between "I think this is stupid" and talking about "this stupidity".

Thank you, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Italy,... for making the product manuals in the boxed products I buy take up 1000% extra space and consume 1000% more trees. Cos, you know, here in Europe they like to make one box that they can sell anywhere.

{citation needed} All versions of English spoken in areas of white native-speaking descent have a very high phonemic similarity. It would not be difficult at all to make a single phonemic spelling that would adequately represent all dialects. There are only a handful of phonemic distinctions that are made only by a minority (WH vs W springs to mind) and even "dropped Rs" are almost never completely dropped.

That's a completely spurious comparison. Latin was spoken by the conquerors, and the locals failed to learn it correctly. The Romance languages show the effects of local language interference (eg intervocalic lenition in Spanish, likely a borrowing from Celtic phonology, insertion of e- at the start of many words in French and Spanish, a borrowing from Basque etc). English is in a completely different situation, because the expansion of the British Empire was concurrent with a population boom triggered by the industrial revolution. This gave a massive surplus population to settle the new colonies. Of course, not every colony got the number of native speakers the US, Australia and New Zealand did. If you look at the Carribean, you'll get creoles arising out of English. Listen to African varieties of English. Or Indian. Or the creoles of Oceania, from the relatively English-like Pitkern and Norfuk to the very exotic, like Bislama. These are the varieties that emerged where native speakers were in the minority -- these are the languages that are analogous to the Romance languages.

Sayest thou that we should cease to use the present progressive...?

You often get people in the UK complaining about how many languages healthcare, tax etc forms and leaflets are in. "A waste of taxpayers' money" they cry, "it's discouraging them from learning the language." Well I've been on the other side, filling out tax forms in a foreign language, and believe me, it's hard. This isn't language you use very often -- it's specialised and often unclear even to native speakers. Dealing with health problems is even more difficult, and as a language teacher, I can't prepare my students for discussing every possible medical complication they might encounter. I had a degree in the language in question -- I struggle to imagine how difficult it would be to approach it after only evening classes at a community library....

Yeah. Man, the gubmint came into my shop just last week and told me I had to put English ingredients on my food labels. I said "hey, Mr Gubmint Man, get off my back. This is Thai curry that I imported from Thailand, so the ingredients are in Thai. Stop trying to tell me what to do!

I bow to your superior knowledge of language dynamics. Shall I tell my university lecturers that they were all wrong then?

Because, you see, it has been seen time and again that if there is one language you can use everywhere, and one that is optional, people use the one you can use everywhere. Before the language laws, people were shifting to English, because there was the expectation and/or fear of not being understood. This has been reversed. By comparison, you have the minority regional languages of France, where only French is official. Without legal protection, the loss of expectation of language means even people that are perfectly competent in speaking the local language tend to use the majority language with each other. Quebec's language policy is working very well, thankyouverymuch, and if you think they look stupid for doing it, well, they think you're pretty damned arrogant for deriding them for refusing to be like you.

That's circular logic: most North Americans that people from Quebec come into contact with are also from Quebec.

You know, I once tried importing my fine German sausages into the US, but the b*st*rds said I had to translate the ingredients into English. Das ist nicht gut! Tyranny of the majority! Interfering with the free market!

Then the business plan is not viable. If a shopkeeper can't charge enough to buy the stock, the shop closes.

A little correction to my figures -- Spotify say that they pay out 70% of gross revenue as royalties, which means each play is worth 0.857 of a cent in income. That's a 115th of a 99c track.