500channelsurfer

Yes x 3. I used to bike in the winter, in Montreal, and also used to bike to Costco. Both are not worth it. The heavy load on my back from Costco-sized shopping is not only hard on me, but harder on the bike, wearing it out faster. But nothing compared to all the SALT dumped on Montreal roads during the winter, rusting all bike components prematurely. Ice chunks on the road are too dangerous. Unless you are the fanatic that has a cleaning station ready after for every ride, you are just ruining your bike. But if you are a fanatic, yes there are bike snow tires. Biking downtown-UBC was fun too! My neighbourhood still has weekly trash/recycle/compost collection. Pickup less often than once a week is unsanitary, there are too many lazy people who will let garbage rot outside, attract vermin, etc. I am shocked garbage every two weeks is a thing. I think Plante has done a good job with road paving overall as compared to previous administrations, however the scheduling (pave Rene Levesque during the Jazzfest for example - scare off tourists for years to come) and too many over-engineered bike lanes and traffic light configurations, the administration has gone too far. The underground bus garage is a catastrophe - should be poster for competition political party in next mayoral race.

The businesses largely shut down due to Covid in March 2020. Inflation went high in late 2001 and 2002, when everything was re-opening. In between, demand was reduced, while natural resources were still being utilized, albeit less. During re-opening, the sudden demand naturally caused a spike, and now the slow natural-resource depletion based inflation returns.

Politicians and the media like to focus on Covid, trade agreements, taxes, oligopolies, immigration, war, etc. because it can further their own agendas. Events in these areas are merely the trigger for price increases that would inevitably occur at some point or another. All human consumption is tied to natural resource extraction, and all important natural resources are becoming more costly to extract or less available. Fossil fuels are the primary natural resource that runs our economies. Easy to extract oil has become a scarcity as it is mostly used up and we have shifted to extracting more difficult oil such as oil sands and fracking. This is more expensive to extract and requires additional inputs in terms of manpower, water, machinery and chemicals. Countries that do still largely extract plain oil have to pump pressure into underground deposits in order to get the product to surface. We drill for oil in the deep sea now whereas we used to have sufficient supply on land. Using non-fossil fuel energy sources still require fossil fuels in their construction, such as in solar panels, nuclear and wind. Energy production costs are higher for these sources. The chemicals and machinery that make agriculture productive rely on fossil fuels and machinery manufactured using fossil fuels. Costs are passed on. Fertilizers and pesticides become more expensive. Underground aquifers that supply irrigation to agricultural land are drying up and expensive water projects are required in order to keep agricultural land irrigated. Small-scale farmers are experimenting with organic agriculture, crop rotation and residuals-as-fertilizer farming techniques, which in the past have been unprofitable but have now become viable. Wood, whether for paper products or construction, has to be sourced from further locations and often poorer quality trees due to easily accessible forests having been emptied of desirable timber. The same goes for other industrial inputs such as the limestone required for concrete. Computers and electric vehicles require inputs of rare minerals which are expensive to mine and manufacture. Exploration for new deposits is a costly affair, but one that is being pursued due to increasing demand. Immigrants travel to new homes for better lives when natural resources at their existing locations become exhausted or priced too high due to depletion.

A review needs to be done of what are all these new public sector jobs, and how do they compare to other countries. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/public-sector-size-by-country A more important way to judge a country is what does the public expense accomplish? Does the country provide efficient healthcare, good education and affordable quality housing? And at what trade-off? Some outlier countries with high public sector rates have nationalized oil sectors or are communist, so even if they do offer efficient healthcare, good education and guaranteed housing, trade-offs such as lack of press freedom, poor working conditions and political repression make them undesirable places to live. Canada's growing public sector seems to be growing in the wrong direction. It's growth is not as concerning as it growing despite not accomplishing significant improvements to our healthcare and education systems and reduction in housing issues. If the public sector was, instead, capable of addressing these issues, it would be good for the economy, as having an educated, healthy and affordably well-housed workforce is.

Electoral College results the last time a Minnesota representative was on the ticket:

For the Quebec riding, recent federal polls in Quebec have been trending toward the Bloc. The most recent two elections and byelections, inclusively, however, in that riding and the one next to it, have been Liberal defeats to the more leftist party, albeit at the provincial level: https://www.electionsquebec.qc.ca/en/results-and-statistics/by-election-results/2023-03-13/326/ https://www.electionsquebec.qc.ca/en/results-and-statistics/general-election-results/2022-10-03/300/ The Quebec Liberal party has been perhaps more weakened than the federal Liberal Party at the time of these elections. But the federal NDP is also not exactly at a strong point in its support. Also, votes for QS are not guaranteed votes for the federal NDP even though those two parties share a significant portion of their voters. Since part of the QS platform is pro-sovereignty, easily some QS voters might vote Bloc instead of NDP. It is rare for Anglophones in Quebec to switch their Liberal votes to another party. Even in the 2011 Orange Wave in Quebec, most federal ridings where there is a high percentage of Anglophones remained Liberal while most other Quebec ridings voted NDP. Since this riding is not nearly as Anglophone as reliably Liberal high-Anglo Quebec ridings, and the riding did vote NDP in 2011, it is not a Liberal stronghold. In the last Federal Election, the Liberals had a commanding lead, about twice that of the NDP and Bloc Québecois: https://www.elections.ca/res/rep/off/ovr2021app/53/11707e.html While Liberal vote losses across Canada currently tend to go Conservative, this riding has a historically low support for Conservatives. Toronto—St. Paul's was a narrow Conservative victory. Due to the Liberal and NDP candidates being city councilors representing different municipal divisions of the same federal riding, while overall trends are toward the Bloc, this riding remains a 3-way coin-toss, and the margin of victory will be narrow.

I would not be surprised if some Dem bosses and/or fundraisers let Biden go on for as long as they were raking in funds, and then dumped him in order to give Harris a chance with all the money and no Trump debate. Maybe they then hope to get her on stage debating against RFK Jr. and no Trump.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-64874821 Scotland's pro-independence party and government have a new leader named Humza Yousaf. He speaks with the accent of a typical worldly Scot, is a seasoned politician and has jumped many political hurdles. He will head, for the moment, a coalition with the Greens. His baggage includes criticisms that occurred almost universally during Covid to cabinet ministers heading equivalent departments in the Western world. He reminds me of Quebec during the late 1990s, when progressive and pro-sovereigntist governments lead with great fanfare to little achievement. History most often repeats, but accumulation of small conditional changes lead up to making history.

If you own land/property or are in the process of owning it (mortgage) you either likely consider the financial industry and easy facilitation of financial transactions important for your mortgage, or for investments if you are mortgage-free (parties more on the right). Farmers are typically land owners and also typically vote right, and particulars of right-wing parties such as the PPC's anti-supply management policy cater to certain farmers. Generally, the agriculture industry and lobbies are tied to right-wing parties. The right broadly is more law-enforcement oriented (protection of private property) whereas extreme leftists are more associated with redistribution. Liberals have made significant policy moves to encourage home-ownership through new first-time-buyer incentives.

The riding is increasingly populated by young urban professionals. Younger Quebekers as a whole have less attachment to Canada as previous generations, but they also have less of the zealous need for independence as did the first generation of Parti-Québecois. At the moment due to Liberal Party of Quebec being in interim leader status and federal Liberals becoming long-in-the-tooth with Trudeau, gravitation to the other parties occurs.

This thread has missed that in recent times, historically, since the Industrial Revolution, and in democracies, rural peoples tend to be more land-owning; and urban areas tend to have a much higher proportion of renters. Land owners overall will naturally favour political parties and platforms that cater to land and property ownership rights. Renters overall will naturally favour political parties and platforms that cater to government intervention to maintain lower prices and good upkeep of their dwellings, subsidize added urban costs such as sidewalks, municipal water and sewage, and the more complex transportation infrastructure requirements of cities. This is of course very basic and overly generalized. Political culture plays the part of explaining the outliers to this generalization, as explanations do exist for why certain suburbs always vote Liberal rather than Conservative, and certain rural ridings NDP. Historical traditions and values including religion, revered past party leaders and corporatism (the issues and lobby groups a political party is associated with) are the most common reasons.

Why is the West fighting this war DUMB? Is it normal to advise everyone including the enemy the exact number of tanks that will be coming, with their exact specifications, expected arrival date, likely point of entry, and expected training time required once they arrive in Ukraine? Is it logical to send a small number of technologically superior tanks to face off against a much larger number of Russian tanks, when this is exactly what Hitler did in order to lose the Battle of Kursk? Is it strategically intelligent to bleed military stockpiles into Europe without any plan to at least replace them, while a Pacific power's military is growing by leaps and bounds?

Culturally, the vast majority of voters vote for party and leader over local candidate whether PR or FPTP. With PR, there is even less local control, and candidates are even more tied to party leaders while ridings have even less attachment to their local candidates. The "pizza pie" parliaments in Europe and elsewhere prove PR causes less stable governments and more gridlock. However, the FPTP system causes such voting distortions between popular vote and parliamentary representation perhaps we should adopt a multi-member plurality system where second-place candidates also gain a seat in parliament only if the riding vote is close enough. It is also time to replace the Monarchy with the Governor General as Head of State, while leaving it a symbolic role only, except for decision to dissolve Parliament and call an election vs. appoint other coalition or whatnot. Maybe the GG could also be elected and party-affiliated, as long as it is a one-ballot deal at the same time as general elections. No mathematical-formula based elections that cause wasted time and money and weeks of each side campaigning in runoffs that destabilize the country, as we see in Brazil and France.

The health care system is broken because the education system is broken. The only long-term solution is to expand the number of educational opportunities to become doctors and nurses. In the 1990s governments cut back on education spots for doctor and nurse education as a short-term measure to ease budgets. Canada should not have to rely on immigrants who are already trained doctors and nurses because our systems make it difficult for them to get their credentials approved, because foreign training always requires some level of adaptation to Canada, and because Canada has a pool of would-be qualified Canadian young people perfectly capable of becoming doctors and nurses if the educational opportunities were there and the professions were attractive. The understaffing in our health care system is driving young Canadians who might have chosen to become a doctor or a nurse to pursue other careers like lawyer or engineer, because the working conditions in health care are terrible. No other field enforces mandatory overtime on their workers after six years, or whatever it is now, university education. So if the government would fund more medical schools and positions, Canadians would see that working conditions in the medical field will improve long-term and more people will have the chance and opportunity to choose a medical career while career prospects are improving. In the meantime, hiring foreign workers and optimizing the systems that we have will have to do.

Dominique Anglade has resigned her seat, and there will be a bi-election called this winter or spring by Premier Francois Legault in her Montreal riding. If the Quebec Liberals do not show strong leadership, this could be a gain for QS, or even Legault's CAQ. Bi-election turnout is normally abysmal, so this will be a test of loyalty for all parties.

Yes, Canada is a civilized place. And also yes, the tribes of Europe have warred on and off for thousands of years. Most of these are short-lived conflicts but occasionally erupt into much larger ones. Since tribes have more formalized into nation-states, wars have become both less frequent but also more intense. Tribalism is an aspect of humanity that also pre-dates human arrival into Europe. Canada's big picture is one where governments are able to be elected by and be supported by multiple tribes, and so we have a normally prosperous and peaceful country unlike the fragmentations elsewhere. Just like many forces of history, good can be the product of many intentions including non-good ones.

I am sorry to say that Zelensy's peace plan is too demanding. If tanks are flowing into Belarus from Russia, Putin may be preparing for another attack front in the case of a Russian rejection of peace negotiations. Zelensky peace plan: https://www.businessinsider.com/zelenskyy-proposes-10-point-peace-plan-ukraine-g20-bali-summit-2022-11 The Crimea has been under Russia for 8 years now; does Zelensky really expect Russia to hand it back over as well as Russian speaking and ethnic regions in Ukraine's far east? Or are these bargaining chips? The world was much safer when there were buffer states between more powerful ones.

The United States was founded and constitution written with violence in mind. The federal government was intended simply to defend its member independent states from British and future oppression and invading forces. Canadian independence happened almost reluctantly. We only brought home our constitution in 1982. We never went to war for it and it only exists as a series of assumed accepted precedents, with referendums to better formalize and change it always failing. The nations of Europe have national identities dating back a thousand year or more so their citizens are much more easily made to feel strongly for their 'tribe.'

Brazil is a bicameral legislative republic much like the United States. This presidential election result by itself is largely symbolic. Without the support of at least some of the legislature, the office of the president is almost as powerless as the Governor General of Canada. Bolsonaro's Liberal party still has more seats in Brazil's Senate and Chamber of Deputies than Lula's Workers' Party does. To compare, say Trump won 100% of the presidential vote, but the Democrats had every Congressperson; despite having the official title of President, Trump would have less actual power than Nancy Pelosi. Lula as president this time around will be a weak presidency as he will require multiple parties in both the Senate and Chamber of Deputies ' approvals for any proposals he intends to pass through. But hey, Presidential elections alone are what grabs the headlines.

I believe you, but please post some sources, because the media is not reporting this point of view.

https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/marie-claude-nichols-expelled-from-que-liberal-caucus-will-sit-as-independent-1.6127743 Marie-Claude Nichols expelled from Que. Liberal caucus, will sit as independent The Quebec Liberal Party may be in the midst of self-destruction here. One can only imagine the toxicity inside a party where MLAs are expulsed from or leave the party before the legislature even re-convenes after an election. August1991, you stated the Liberals are now the "Anglo party" and of course that is true, but unfortunately for the Anglade Liberals that is only true because their support comes solely from the most Anglo ridings of Quebec. The Anglade Liberals cannot expand their base beyond this by being the "Anglo party" because they have already won all the Anglo ridings. Anglade is not Anglo and does not market herself as an Anglo rights activist whatsoever. The MPs elected are also largely non-Anglo and largely not necessarily Anglo-rights. Anglo voters need only the chance to jump ship to another party that has a chance at some power and they will change their votes in droves. Remember the Equality Party? ------- In the recent Quebec election apparently the Québecois decided en masse they simply wanted a French-language nationalist who has demonstrated himself as largely non-ideological, capable of shifting policy with the wind, and has come off looking good from the pandemic, only comparatively (against Covid-disaster associated politicians).

The Wildrose is in

Very good analyses, Benz and Jack9000. ? This problem of first-past-the-post is nothing new, and time and time again the issue comes back every provincial and federal election, and no governing party does anything about it. Except that one time in B.C. where a referendum was held to "fix" this problem, and the proposal was defeated. A similar proposal was also defeated in Australia's first-past-the-post system. I watched the debate closest to the election as well as the Tout le monde en parle in which all leaders were present, and in reflection, despite the seat results admittedly being questionably undemocratic, the quality of the leaders and their debating was top notch. All the leaders, Legault, Anglade, Duhaime, Plamondon, Nadeau-Dubois, displayed respect towards each other at a level that has not been seen in any recent Canadian or US election. As well, the polls were overall accurate, even the less accurate ones. At least Québec's democracy has this going for it. This should make for an exciting 2026 Québec election.

I wonder if anyone finds intriguing that the one and only media-covered story of elections law disobedience was a QS candidate caught specifically on-camera removing a PQ pamphlet, where the result was QS withdrawal from the riding race entirely, and the PQ, the only other major pro-independence party, leader winning, in an unlikely-to-win riding?

https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/2022-09-24/societe-saint-jean-baptiste/une-petition-lancee-pour-exiger-l-abolition-de-la-monarchie-au-quebec.php The Québecois are already starting. Admittedly the SSJB is fairly radical, but PQ and QS could pick this up. We will have to see if federal leaders also pick up on this for whether there will be a reaction from the other Quebec parties. During the recent debates most Quebec candidates did not want to talk about this as they all said it is extremely low-priority and they do not want to re-open this Pandora's Box.