CdnFox

But if they flip back and forth like that then it's not a sign of having more than one culture. It's a sign of either mental instability or a fake appeal to culture. It's insincerity and it'll come across that way over time. It's a 'black of convenience' thing, not a 'black culture' thing.

Tru Dat! Oh... wait.. crap!

absolutely, you're a terrible person. Go back to sleep.

Based on his argument i'd say it's at the top of his head.

Really means nothing. First, taking a snapshot of one year in a decade isn't useful. And there's a number of other factors it doesn't look at like cost of rent - if rent is super cheap then people aren't as quick to buy a home, but if rents become unafordable as they are today then people tend to severely overextend themselves to get into a house just to have somewhere to live. ANd it doesn't discuss the type of home - if you've got a family of four crammed into an apartment they own vs two people living in a 3000 sq ft home 30 years earlier - that's not the same thing . You'll note in my previous post debt is going up, people are struggling to afford homes but they'll buy what they can in desperation.

I'm well aware that's wrong. I work in the industry. Well - maybe its true in some other part of canada but i doubt it. The average sq ft of a one bedroom apartment for example being built in the 80's was about 750 sq ft .The average one bdrm being built in vancouver right now is closer to 450 sq ft. The common home build in the suburbs of vancouver in the 70's was an actual house and was about 3000 - 3500 sq ft. The common home now is a townhouse and about 1500-1700 sq ft. Here you go - it specifically notes that sizes have decreased since the 'haydays' and that the MEDIAN size is now about 760 ish sq ft for ALL condos. Median size of new Metro Vancouver condos shrinking, but not as quickly as in Toronto - Business in Vancouver (biv.com) In canada - house prices relative to income are going up, house sizes are going down (shrinkflation if you will). People until the pandemic ate out more becuase people had less time to cook for themselves. the average debt per household, an important indicator, has been going UP in canada and down in the us . Canada’s increasing household debt burdens households with high interest rates Household debt in Canada has been rising inexorably. At the time of the recession in 2008, it stood at about 80% of the size of the economy, in 2010 it rose to 95%, and by 2021 debt exceeded its size. By contrast, household debt in the U.S. fell from 100% of GDP in 2008 to about 75% in 2021. While U.S. households reduced debt, Canadians increased theirs and this will likely continue to increase unless we address affordability in the housing market. Exploring the Impacts of Household Debt on Canada's Economy | CMHC (cmhc-schl.gc.ca) You're quite simply wrong

CAAAAA NAAAAA DAAAA Don't tell me about life in another country. This is canada. And i was there kiddo.

That makes it more interesting. I mean, i get how as a left leaning biden harris supporter you'd prefer it downplayed but if anything it raises more questions. If it were some sort of 'larger plan' like iran or something that would be expected. But now we have to ask how does a kid with no real history of radicalization and no outside influence come to the decision to kill donald trump? How much of a role did the constant democrat insistence that trump was hitler and would end democracy play in driving this kid over the edge? Will we see more left leaning shooters if this rhetoric keeps up?

You know this is Canada right? None of that applies here at all. Shall i post some charts from bolivia which refute it?

Heritage and culture isn't a choice. And if you believe in the religion and gods' will then it's not really a choice either It's like saying being gay is a 'choice'. IS it genetic? No, but it's not exactly a 'choice'.

Its a thousand frikkin' pages, there's no chance he's even going to read it. If there's some policy in there that makes sense there's nothing to stop him from considering it and enacting it after he's won but its a little late in the election to be learning about and adopting massive new policy documents. Get through the eleciton on the plan you've got (which is WORKING - he's up again in the polls and harris is leveling off and going down slightly) and then he'll have 4 years to read the thing and adopt the parts that he likes.

No, you're not. You're denying basic simple verifyable facts. The GG (the kings rep) is the ONLY person with power to call an election in Canada. And also the ONLY person who can ALLOW A GOV"T TO BE FORMED. Every single time there's an election the GG decides who will be the gov't. IF it's a clear majority then it's easy but there have been times when a number of parties have suggested they would form a coalition gov't instead and the GG is the one who decides if that will be allowed - or if when a gov't loses the confidence of the house if another party will be given a chance or if there will be an election. THat prevents things like what we're seeing in venezuela. That is a simple fact, but your complete lack of knowledge of how gov't works is preventing you from understanding that. He's right, you're wrong, you're stupid. Thanks for playing

His representative, the Governer General, can. And does. And has for every single election we've ever had. They've also forced elections or denied elections on occasions where political parties were playing games with democracy. you're completely uneducated.

She's the incumbent - if there's a need for renewal and hope it's because her and biden left things stagnant and dispair. How do you run on a message of renewal and hope when you're the reason people need renewal and hope? I see trump is up again in the polls.

Doesn't matter if it matters, his question was why are you doing it?

Call it what you will, people do learn the ways of the local culture, they establish themselves in the job market and begin to build a track record, they find stable housing and begin to put down ties in their community. They become, as you say, functional. At that point they don't need "help", they can continue on thier path themselves. Then the resources that went to get them settled can go to someone else. But it takes years in some cases, and meanwhile people are still flooding in and suddenly there aren't enough resources to go around which makes things worse and you wind up with an ever-growing number of unhappy and scared people who begin to get a little desperate. And that's a recipe for serious disaster.

Right - that's why you always have to worry about a republican nutbar shooting the democrat candidate . Oh.... wait....

Oh if you're saying trump tells some whoppers i'm not going to argue But most of his stuff is just gross exaggeration. "I RAN THE BEST PRESIDENCY EVER". Meh - it was decent enough but not the best. Etc etc. Everything with him is the best most fantastic ever or the worst in the history of worsedom. He does tell some out and out lies for sure. Honestly i didn't see Hillary or Biden as any better, biden arguably worse.

They changed the definitions of impoverished. They can no longer be measured directly. People ate out at restaurants all the time. But they also ate at home more because women could afford to stay at home and cook. The reason people go out more now is they don't have the time. Which puts even further burden on their expenses. Constantly. And they took trips across the country and did a lot more outdoor activities like camping and boating and fishing and hunting. We would spend two or three weeks at a time on the boat, nowadays it would be financially extremely difficult to do that. Homes were considerably bigger then. A young couple starting off might very well find themselves in a nice three bedroom home. A young couple starting off today would barely be able to afford a one bedroom condo You are completely out to lunch (pun intended ) There was never a time when we spent anywhere close to 30 percent. Maybe in some town in the yukon or something. But nope, no where near that for the average person. It might be that if only one person was working the house hold might spend about 15 percent back in the day but honestly food was cheaper. Except eggs and milk and such. As a median canadian from the good ole days - yes you're a lazy whiny group But that's a seperate issue. Right now the kids have it harder than young people in the 70's did. The early 80's were tough but the 90's were better.

They may be adjusted for the inflation rate based on the 'basket of goods' which is somewhat useful but is not the same as actual inflation that people experience. there are a number of things they do to 'levelize' the rate and it often doesn't reflect lived experience. As a silly example to give the idea, if beef goes up 10 percent but anchovy paste goes down 5 percent they will report that groceries went up an average of 5 percent. But how much anchovy paste do you buy? There is also tech inflation. In 1970 you were lucky to have one phone line per household. ANd that's all that was needed because the world adapted to that. You MIGHT have had cable tv, but many if not most did not. NOW you pretty much have to have a cell for every teen or older in the house (50 bucks per phone on a family plan avg), you really can't get away without internet (90 bucks a month) even if you don't have cable tv. Those are expenses that weren't necessary in the past. THe percent of money people used to spend on housing and groceries was well under 35 percent in the past, now for many it's over that just for the housing and the food is a lot more. As a young guy renting a home in the 80's i paid about 28 percent of my income and i didn't have great income, nowadays even people with above average income can find themselves paying well over 35 percent Objectively it's harder to get by right now.

ahem. From the us papers today: Secret Service Acting Director Testifies on Attempted Assassination of Trump | C-SPAN Classroom IT's still in the news, it's still being talked about, it will be revived at the appropriate time, it is what it is, pls cope.

You don't know what the Governor General is, do you.

Yeah that was obvious. He doesn't understand what you're talking about, he's very clearly not educated on political systems. As we both know it's not common for me to agree but yes, you're correct and that is the benefit of the westminster model, or at least of having a GG (the monarchy really isn't important per se) the GG is the circuit breaker for democracy - doesn't have much to do most of the time but when they do it's critical. And it's come up several times in our history.

Sigh. He didn't say monarchy. He said constitutional monarchy. And while i usually disagree with him, @blackbird is quite right although what he means is the Westminster system of gov't. And he didn't say revolution wasn't impossible he said that what was happening in venezuela wouldn't be. And that is because the GG acts like a democracy circuit breaker. If for example trudeau illegally tried to stay in power the GG would say 'nope' and that gov't would no longer be legitimate. So. On top of everything else you don't understand the difference between a monarchy and a constitutional monarchy modeled on the westminster system.Fak kid - is there anything you DO know?