CdnFox

Ok - and so how would it look if you had a magic wand and could break it up appropriately. What would the 'countries' be.

Unfortunately that's the way it should be but frequently isn't. i"ve known a few judges. Bias plays a role. The law matters less than the 'interpretation' of the law. It's the old joke " The judge says "the law says yes. And by yes it means no"" In the example given it's ALL about feelings. There is no "Cruelometer" to determine how 'cruel' a law is, that's just subjective. And no 'Unusualometer" either. Judges have a bad habit of thinking they make the law and that what politicians produce is just the clay they mould as they see fit. And judges can be a little partisan. As you may recall harper tried to put an end to that by coming up with a method of selecting judges that was more fair and inclusive and more likely to produce a neutral result. Justin killed it immediately after taking power.

It's referred to as such, it's considered to be as such and even had some medical experts backing it. But - as i said, you don't like it, so what you REALLY mean is that you are FINE with gov't types making medical decisions for people as long as they're ones you like. Better hope it stays that way

yeah.. i'm just gonna go ahead and drape this bullet proof vest over you for a minute here... try not to move, it triggers their attack instincts.

What would it look like if you had a magic wand to do it?

Is it "take off and nuke them from orbit, it's the only way to be sure"? That had occurred to me.

Ahem. https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/conversion-therapy-is-now-illegal-in-canada-1.5731911 I don't believe in Conversion therapy but it was something people chose, not something they were forced into. And the gov't took that off the table. So what you mean is that you're happy that the gov't and not medical people are making the decisions because you approve of the decisions - and you're unhappy when you don't. Gotcha.

Of course - they both think they're the greatest thing in the world and they know they can't both be right Sure. There's a lot of that going around. I don't really see how we're going to fix it any time soon either.

Who wrote the constitiution and formed Canada? oh yeah... the conservatives. !diot. And yes they were for the charter Weren't even there when the constitution was originally written? Well you've got me there kid. And who opposed later changes? Manitoba quebec and newfoundland. Two red provinces and a mixed. Sorry kid - history remembers it differently than you do. Maybe you shouldn't be calling other people senile?

Well - possibly true in part. I don't believe you can have too many wealthy - i wish everyone was However there's caveats with that. The power thing you might find me more in agreement on. Tho less so in canada than the states to a degree.

That is demonstrably untrue. The most centralized gov'ts are left leaning, and that is the way it HAS to be - socialism of any form requires a more centralized power and authority to pull off.

There is nothing in history that doesn't ripple through history. But colonialism is in fact over and people today get to choose how to handle that. And their decisions are THEIR responsibility, not 'colonialism's'

You misunderstood the answer then. It was in response to your statement that we have too many rich 'oligarchs' at the top controlling things (paraphrase) and i noted that so do socailst countries - the leaders are not poor. Maybe. I think we've got a ways to go yet. But you can never tell.

The similarities between trump and trudeau in MANY areas is shocking. We cannot. To be honest - we can't even stop the slide or prevent things from being worse. And i'll guess the next election will bring even more diversionary tactics from him.

(DUCK!) - well then those people are asswipes and the left is just another form of failed communism and socalism and will drive people to poverty and ruin. All that does is water down the top. You wind up wiht a lower 'average' player. The correct answer is to have more 'ladders'. Basket ball may be one - but how about pro baseball? Someone who sucks at basket ball might be great at that. Or soccer? or badminton, hockey, whatever. Now people can try to find a success ladder that works for them and a place on that ladder they're comfortable with. A successful society doesn't try to fake alter a specific ladder - it seeks to make sure the most ladders possible exist and that people can find them and then let them do what they want.

Yeah - not even a tiny bit true If it were we wouldn't have one - they wouldn't have hit the 7/50 rule. The only thing that conservatives complained about was that they felt there should be a right to property, and actually trudeau was for that too but the provincial leaders shot it down. Sure kid Sooo - you're smarter than the lawyers and judges are you? ROFLMAO

Sure, but as i noted there's a difference. Did you forget how 'not stupid' i really am? If i say something its probably got some pretty seriously defensible facts and logic behind it. Doesn't mean i'm always right but dismissing anything i say as stupid is... well.... stupid If you have questions ask. If you disagree make your case. Well unfortunately that's a problem for pretty much ALL social and economic models. And in nature as well - when you get a species which consumes but has no natural enemies then nature has a way of sorting that out - eventually you reach an extinction event and the population crashes and either vanishes or starts over from a small number But that's future eyeball and future fox's problem

that is how all socialist and communist countries are. You think putin is poor? Or that castro didn't have enough to eat? The difference is that when a person gets rich in capitalism they tend to take a lot of people with them, and everynoe's life gets better at least a little. In communism, the rich get rich by directly tapping the efforts of the lower people, so ONLY they benefit.

And where did they get the weapons and such? As is often the case with you, the answer is far too simple. Had there not been a western front that would have freed up a lot of additional resources for the eastern offensive. And if the allies were out of the picture then russia would have been very hard pressed for materials. Especially if one asks 'why' was there no western front. Presumably that would mean that some sort of peace or agreement was reached with the British and that threat was neutralized. The resources that would have been set to fight in france and spain would have been available for russia. A number of the turning point battles were lost by a very small margin. Even a small difference in manpower and material could have forced it to go the other way. It might not have, but there's a strong chance it would have. I don't think the russians would have won in the end without western help. I think without western help they most likely (not guaranteed) would have fallen.

If you find reading a single page of text onerious then that's a cry for education and a brain transplant. And i felt "the rates are higher than you think because they're applied to higher value properties" was pretty concise - but it was too much for you to understand without further explanation. And once again - you feel bad about how the conversation went and your big complaint is "U USE 2 MANY WORDS! ME HEAD HURT! UGH". Hell kid - learn to read. And think - you woudln't have been in that position if you'd thought a little when i did make it simple. Sure kid And its' pretty obvious you're obsessing over this. As the math shows, you were wrong. It happens. But apperently it's eating you alive And yet that's apparently what you gave - which is sad If making a simple mistake and being wrong causes you this much grief you need to rethink being on the internet. In the meantime - they say laugher helps soothe the tortured soul. Have this

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/saskatchewan-plan-to-run-coal-power-plants-beyond-2030-would-be-illegal-guilbeault-says Federal regulations require all coal power plants to be closed, converted to natural gas or equipped with carbon-capture systems by the end of 2029 His comment comes as electricity generation becomes the latest jurisdictional battle over climate policy between federal and provincial governments. Canada’s current climate plan aims for all electricity to be emissions-free by 2035, and regulations to enforce the target are expected later this year. The draft policy published last year suggests that by 2035, all electricity will have to be clean — such as hydroelectricity, nuclear, wind or solar. Either that or the emissions will have to be abated somehow, such as with carbon capture and storage systems. Under the proposal, some natural gas plants built before regulations are established would be able to operate after 2035 for an as-yet-undefined length of time. This is insane. No big deal for quebec or bc but that is a SERIOUS burden to put on the prairie provinces without offering a nickle to help out with the costs.

Canada saw the same things as far as positives go. And - people moved to the suburbs. You have to remember - the VAST majority of our TINY population lives in small clusters. There's more people living in California than in Canada, so that gives you some idea of how much open land we have around the cities. Remote work allowed people to move out of the cities where there is a lack of housing to take advantage of some of the housing in the more rural and suburban areas. Which for a short time eased the problems in the cities with rent and housing prices.

There should at least be some law that says that the medical or other agents of the gov't cannot offer it as a suggestion. Here's the conversation i fear: Veteran "I'm still struggling, sometimes it's hard to sleep and some days i think it's just too much to get out of bed". Councillor" "well - there is a way to end all of that right now. And i think it's time you consider it. You can choose MAID. Veteran "But i don't want to die!" Councillor "but you don't want to live in pain either right? Resources from the gov't to help with conditions like yours have been cut back dramatically. Maybe it's time to rest soldier. ' Veteran "I don't know... maybe you're right. Maybe there's no hope for me. Ok.. " This has apperently already happened. And a number of veterans did choose this way out before some came forward and said they were being counseled to go that route. I absolutely believe in people's freedom of choice, But in a weak moment, a person of authority can easily manipulate someone who'd at a vunerable time into doing something they would not normally do

Which playing field tho? If we were talking about leveling people's access to opportunities that might be one thing. Accessing equality of outcome is another. And it feels like initially the left was all about the former, going back years. Now it's about the latter. Access to opportunity is actually pretty good these days. so there is a tendency for those on the left looking for a cause to pursue equality of outcome, and that's where we run into a problem. Nope - they had the benefits of socialism and communism the left loves to espouse

Probably from being stabbed by someone on parole