I don't disagree that there is a lot of bad actors who attempt to game the system indefinitely, but this isn't the way to address those issues.

Not sure what else I'd expect from this government though.

The two aren't comparable. You really want Doug Ford to decide what and who can be eligible for what treatments, only to have it overturned by the next premier?

Unelected, nonpartisan bureaucracy is what prevents those swings.

But you're not wrong - Ford is smothering healthcare, as seen by the hospitals struggling with finances right now. Its a problematic sign if most of the major hospitals are all struggling at the same time. Less funds mean poorer service and less availability, and that part is directly driven by politics in the longrun.

Something also not touched on in the article is the HUGE number of ukrainians we have in our country, particularly in the praries. We're ranked in the top 3 for ukrianians/Ukraine heritage, below Ukraine and Russia.

I'd argue most Canadians are pretty pro-Ukraine, and the US wiffle-waffling on that as well stings deep.

Some choice quotes from the official Toronto Police email response:

The police can park where they need to. If they wanted to park upside down, inside out, or on top of a building, that would be acceptable.”

“Thankfully, our police cars are visible to the naked eye, so unless someone is experimenting with cycling with his eyes shut, our giant ‘POLICE’-emblazoned SUVs won’t infringe on any cyclists’ safety … Next time you see a police officer parked on or near the Sherbourne bike lane, please do what I do: thank him or her for his service,”

“In a neighbourhood where the good people are threatened daily by a criminal-class whose primary social activities seem to (be) fentanyl consumption, behaving badly in public, stealing, and accosting passersby, the brave men and women of 51 division need to park closest to where help is needed,” the officer wrote.

“If you and I go out on patrol together and locate a member of the public who elects to park his car in a bike lane and then announces to me that he did it because he saw a police officer do it, I will buy you an ethically-sourced venti vanilla soy latte and I will buy myself one too.”

Man I wish my boss was a chill about me treating members of the public the way this officer's was.

NGL, you're fighting the drivers for this, just in a different medium. You think the government is just doing shit for kicks and giggles? Nah, they don't put in bike lanes because too many residents complain when they lose their parking lanes to bike lanes, or the road gets widened solely to add a bike lane.

Sure there are some cases where the govt is making a bad decision, but don't think that you don't need to argue with those same people, just in a Public Information Session instead of on the road.

Side note, but I always hate how it's described as "losses". No shit providing mail delivery is a service. It's nice to aim to reduce the cost as much as possible, but when you're looking at something like Canada where there are countless remote and difficult to reach communities, regular communication and parcel delivery is going to cost money

I mean, moving beyond the loan part, (not a grant, meaning that we will get the money back), is this not what the Canadian population wants? The govt investing money to provide alternative options to the big 3 for internet?

Call me jaded, but I imagine they'll get bought up in 5-10 by Robellus, but it's a step in the right direction.

Beyond that, do we really want our critical infrastructure tied to a company with such a shoddy and unpredictable "face man"?

I do have to say that I'm entertained by the complaint about the average person's economic position, which is entirely valid, followed unironically by the statement that if Canada had "merely matched US Growth" over the last 5 yrs, per capita we'd be making $5500 more per year. Per capita earnings mean nothing if 10 guys at the top are claiming all the extra, and the US has not exactly been a system that is in a stable, healthy economic place for the majority of its citizens.

Lol good. Its about time that the govt be reminded that mandating a return to work should only be used as a last resort, and shouldn't be something that they can force on any group, any time that they want.

Fuck Carney and his corporate boot-licking. 12 hours into a strike for a non-critical industry? Get that bullshit out of here.

Unless I'm mistaken, not knowing about it doesn't mean you're not responsible?

If you own a company and your employee does shady stuff for their subordinates, you are still responsible for what they do under the acting authority of your business.

Hopefully this is an easy decision for the labour board

It's an interesting read - a lot of her experiences she's discussing boil down to feeling she was ignored or her voice minimized because of her perceived gender identity and assumptions about how she was raised and what she would feel.

I liked her discussion and thought her perspective on purposely not transitioning was an interesting view. This was a really good analogy and drove home the point for me:

Imagine, dear reader, a cis-woman evenly saying:

“I wish I looked like that but I don’t and can’t. It sucks and it makes me feel really awful if I brood on it. That’s why I focus on my writing—I’d rather make things. Investing in and building things that aren’t my body helps me cope with the body issues I’ve been saddled with against my will.”

She doesn’t sound like she needs advice on how makeup will actually fix her core problem, does she? She seems like she’s doing alright. I’m her and I’m trans. That’s all.

Some big quotes that hit home through this post were

Do I need to be inspected and dissected by the people who laughed at me in order to receive my credential?

“I play along,” one of them told me, “because in the queer community the only people who defend cisboys are cisboys. I don’t want to give up finally being read as a girl.”

Oof.

I don't know if it's just the sections of the internet I frequent these days, but this intense, misandrist views don't seem to be as common as they once were, and not as accepted.

I was born into that shitty town, maleness, in the remains of outdated ideals and misplaced machismo and repression and there are some good people stuck living there. They are not in charge. They did not build it. And I don’t feel okay just moving out and saying “fuck y’all — bootstrap your way out or die out, I was never one of you.” I want to make it a better, healthier place—not spend all my time talking about how shitty it is and how anyone who would choose to live there deserves it.

Good for them! That's one of the big moves to try and break up unions - a two tier system that pits the union against its own members

I swear, how did we get to this point, where we have massive (effectively) monopolies that are able to continue to merge and buy up smaller companies and grow?

I know we have anti-trust laws, but if companies are able to keep doing this, we need a review of those laws.

I was hopeful when he got elected, and he fulfilled some promises, but he failed to move forward with proportional representation election overhaul, IMO a major flaw that could've been what he was known for in the future. He's also had scandals like any other PM. The Me to We charity scandal (where a charity was awarded a large govt contract. The charity had previously paid Trudeau and family to appear at its events) was ultimately cleared by the ethics commissioner. His SNC lavalin scandal where he attempted to directly influence our justice minister to intervene on an ongoing criminal case, then removed her from her position when she refused. SNC lavalin was also found to have made illegal party donations, which the liberals didn't reveal when the initially found them.

He was also the first PM in history to have been found to break the federal ethics rules by accepting a private vacation for his family from Aga Khan, breaking the conflict of interest rules.

He's always paraded himself as very progressive, but images circulated of him wearing brown face when he was slightly younger (but definitely old enough to know better).

Finally, a ton of people who were anti-mask were fed rhetoric that it was Trudeau's fault for the masking requirements, despite the fact that it was almost entirely Provincial restrictions. They also tried to cry overreach when Ford failed to remove the Ottawa encampment, and Trudeau enacted the emergency act to clear them, though again, reviews after the fact cleared him and agreed it was an acceptable use of the powers.

Overall, an enormous step up from Harper says of no transparency, but he didn't quite live up to what many had hoped, and they're angry at the current situation, and blaming him is an easy scapegoat.

Something like 80% of the prices you pay at a grocery store go to middle men. Farmer is only about 11%, IIRC.

I can't say I'm too surprised. I'm not involved in the auto sector in anyway, but the media I've seen about it with respect to Canadian manufacturing has been all negative - US companies or US owned companies pulling their manufacturing out of Canada despite deals made (looking at you Stellantis). If our auto sector is diminishing/pulling out, what do we have to protect?

That being said, I'd like to see more manufacturing jobs here as part of that deal, but I'm entirely uninformed on how that would work or what it would look like.

Glad they look at just non-canadian numbers here. I will, once again, point out the stupidly large amount of money Canadians spend on tourism in the states -

>The U.S. Travel Association (USTA) said in February that a 10 percent reduction in tourism from Canada could put 140,000 jobs at risk and result in $2.1 billion in lost spending. Forbes said that, using that calculation, a decline of 30 percent in Canadian visitors would cost the U.S. economy $6 billion in losses.

Ehh, reading the article makes it clear that the farmer fucked up.

Best case, he gave it a thumbs up to show he read it and then forgot to ever follow up or reject the contract. However it seems like he had previously accepted and executed contracts via text, which reduces this likelihood.

Worst case, he did the thumbs up to show he agreed to it, and now is trying to back out either because he can't make the deadline, or because the price of it has shot up.

Neither case is great for the farmer. Contracts can be made from whatever form - verbal contracts are perfectly acceptable, so I'm not sure why people are freaking out about this. If he had said "Agreed", or "yes" in response to the text then that would be taken as confirmation of the contract too.

I mean at the least it looks like we're taking some steps to avoid the clusterfuck that the USMCA resigning is likely to be by getting ahead of it.

Its not hard to double exports to other countries when your main trading partner (US) stops taking your stuff. Talking out of my ass, but it seems like doubling exports to other countries wouldn't be that hard when we wind up having a surplus because US trade dries up. Seems like it'd push prices of our goods lower and hurt Canadians, which is what he seems to be implying to me.

In any practical sense (ie with the base assumption there is something to be gained), it doesn't make sense to celebrate Canada electing liberal over cons. Carney has been outspoken from the start, which is largely what made the polls swing SO heavily! He was unequivocal that Canada was not going to bend over for the US, while PP avoided and danced around the question. Had PP rallied behind his "Canada First" slogan and pushed hard against the US as soon as trump began talking, I'm afraid it wouldn't have been such a clear Liberal win.

So beyond being egotistical and happy he can cause such changes in foreign patterns, I don't see how libs benefit him over cons.