sorted by: new top controversial old
[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago


I wound up doing more of a dive into per capita GDP as a metric, and see more of the benefits of it, as well as why its used. I'm still not entirely sold on its benefits overall due to concerns over wealth inequality and "living standards" being averaged.

Thanks for pointing out CPI vs GDP/C differences!

[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago

Beyond the issues of it being NaPo and the Fraser Institute being the main interviewee, using per person GDP as a measure of living standards seems.... Wildly out of touch. There are no comments on consumer pricing index (with all its flaws).

Literally they hinge their proof of "living standards" on average GDP.

I don't even know how to begin addressing that.

[-] [email protected] 20 points 4 days ago

If you don’t know why ‘email’ doesn’t get an S on the end, then I think we’ve lost the illusion of authority.

Plenty of people seem to weigh in on either side.

This linguistic argument is hardly a settled thing, and definitely not on par with their/there/they're mistakes.

Our Government Weighs in, in favour of emails

submitted 4 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
[-] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

Oof, they need to find better people to interview.

Brandon Parent lives 14km from his work (Leslieville to St Joes)- a 45min bike ride down by the water along the waterfront trail. Definitely doable for 8ish months of the year. TTC shows ~an hour.

“I know that the work they are doing is for safety, I get that.” Parent said. “I just feel like it wasn’t well-planned out.”

As a civil engineer, this is the go to complaint by alllll residents who are impacted by any construction. Driveways are inaccessible for a few days while concrete curbs cure? Poorly planned. Big trench that narrows a residential road down to 1 lane? Poorly planned.

With how large of a project this is, I promise you that a dozens of people have spent hundreds to thousands of hours reviewing the best way to reduce the impact while not spending 20 year to complete the works.

It boils down to people wanting infrastructure to work without the inconvenience of the upkeep it requires.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

Typically most grants from the government come with strings attached. Those strings are typically a minimum amount of the money going directly to the people it helps.

In this case, that means going to pay the rent on these houses (or the subsidized amount), and setting some aside for the repairs to the program. I'd guess the way they're worded would likely force the organizations to choose to either pay good wages, and keep good social workers, or skimp on the wages and get more bodies in seats, and in theory, more people helped. But paying poor wages means there are fewer good people to work for you, and you wind up in other troubles. Pay them too much, and a news article about cushy governmental jobs catches peoples eye and the program gets shuttered. Those strings are supposed to prevent massive bloat of admin/staffing costs that eat up all the cash without providing a full benefit for the people it should be helping. Which makes sense - its easy to see how funding without those strings could easily lead to poorer and poorer outcomes for those its supposed to help. The tricky part is finding the balance, and the way the article phrases it, it seems like there isn't enough support for these people available.

[-] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago

What do you consider treating people equally?

[-] [email protected] 11 points 5 days ago

That seems like an odd take. Literally any tax or incentivization would be "punishing" those who can't/don't use it.

Is providing school funding via taxes punishment for parents who want to homeschool their children?

Is providing any kind of child care/child education funding punishment for childfree people?

Is increases in funding for rural internet or road reconstruction punishment for people who choose to live in cities or don't drive?

[-] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago

Article claims about a 75% success rate, though success isn't defined. But that means for a guy with 13 units, he's basically guaranteed at least one failure (98% chance).

If failure means his place gets trashed with minimal support from the original agency due to understaffing or budget problems, then we need to reevaluate the setup, because that's not a level of risk that seems fair.

I know people don't like to see their tax dollars going towards people's salary, but this sounds like a pretty good case for more social workers.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

Oh man this guy seems unhinged. I found a few other articles over the years in the peterborough examiner that talk about him, never in a great light.

Sad that he seems so far gone - self-declaring himself chief of his own nation and becoming banned from the local municipalities council chambers and other properties

[-] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It should exist for short term, emergency situations, IMO. Not for passing long term laws where it will need to be invoked every 5yrs forever to keep going

[-] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's definitely in his interest to try and portray lobbyists as useless. If/when this becomes a big story for him, he can pivot and say they're not doing their company any good anyway, so it shouldn't matter.

In December, Poilievre expressed disdain for Bay Street executives, saying he "almost never" speaks to crowds in downtown Toronto or "anywhere close to Bay Street."

Fundraising records show Poilievre has headlined three fundraisers for the Conservative Party on Bay Street and at least four others in downtown Toronto since 2023.

Lol, anyone who thinks Pierre is a "for the people" man is more gullible than those who thought Trudeau was.

Edit: as the article mentions, Liberals made it mandatory to post who's attending these events ahead of time (when >200$/person). CPC fought against it on the grounds of, (an actual quote from the debate minutes)

My question for the minister is this: why legalize something that is ethically unacceptable?

And Pierre voted against the bill.

[-] [email protected] 6 points 3 weeks ago

Uhhh, ISG senators show a voting record with more rejections than the partisan system we had before did - even NaPost analysis shows a better result than previous senate/government voting recods (with an enormous number of nominees, which would make it easy for Liberals to consolidate power, if that was their sole goal.)

NaPost Analysis

Conservative Senate leader Don Plett dismissed the ISG’s independence, pointing out that Trudeau appointees never threaten to defeat any government legislation.

Plett said ultimately he also doesn’t believe the Senate should be standing in the way of an elected government’s mandate.

“I don’t think that’s the Senate’s role. I think it’s a senator’s role to give it sober second thought and to try to improve legislation that is flawed when it comes to us.”

He both complains they don't threaten to strike down legislation, then goes on to say he doesn't believe their role is to strike it down, but suggest improvements. The only way they should reject a bill, as agreed by ISG members;

Simons said voting down a bill has to be a measure of last resort, although she has voted against final reading on several government bills. “If we oppose a bill, we have to have a really sound reason for doing so, that isn’t just ‘I could write a better one’.”

Now we have, in name an in voting patterns within the groups, bipartisan groups in the senate, not just "off-broadway house of commons".

Before creating his new Canadian Senators Group caucus, Tannas said taking a partisan approach all the time felt limiting and wasn’t in line with what he wanted to do as a senator.

“That’s the part I hated. I detest the game that we’ve somehow got to be some off-Broadway version of the House of Commons,” he said.

submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

Hi All,

I'm going to be moving soon from an outbuilding on a family property with plenty of space, gardens, and a clean creek into renting a 3-storey condo- style townhome in a small city 30mins away. There is no yard space, though I do have a small balcony.

What are some of the key preps that you all have or would recommend for a place like this? I have a number of things at my current house that I'll bring - mainly 1+week of food/water stores, but you never know what you don't know, so I'd appreciate input from anyone with other thoughts or ideas of things I should get.

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

I've been biking for a number of years, primarily single track XC or gravel riding. I do adventure racing, which is incredibly tough on the bikes, but am hoping to improve my bike life.

What are some of the important bike maintenance things that you all do?

view more: next ›


joined 11 months ago