myata

Nothing new. This is important. Same wages can do different things if things are done differently. Not implying but that's quite possible, if their environment, operational practice and tradition give them no incentives to seek and find working solutions, instead of asking for more dough to throw at a system that hasn't changed since 1960-s. And then, if one or two hospitals in Canada found working solutions, had no queues and great service standards, how would we know that? Would we even know, why?

I actually seen it with my own eyes. Nothing about Jews so must be another Russia bullshit. Deep yawn. When Russia spills anything of substance, other than blusterous lies and boring bullshit let us know. Not holding breath it'll be awhile (long). Fire parade, Spain India has light festival oh horror Nazis taking over the world. Russia celebrates grand opening of newest advanced toilet "Putin" (you wish it was a joke)

At the core of the issue is a simple thing: disconnect. From the reality. No feedback. If you are in a business and there's high demand for your product, you'll go out of your way to make corrections and improvements to meet it. It just makes sense for you. If you are a public hospital CEO / bureaucracy and the demand for services is growing, you ask for more dough and do nothing. Why? Nothing would change for you if you did. This is no calculus. Throughput, throttling issues are ubiquitous and solutions known for decades. The question is other though: do you have any incentives to think about the problems and deliver working solutions? Do you have to deliver working solutions or only ask for more dough instead of solutions? Is CEO salary and bonuses dependent on meeting service standards, with maximum wait times? There. If there's no incentives to change, even a perfect solution won't do anything.

Exactly. It's not about sticking a cliche, crying horrors but making things work. The bureaucracy doesn't know and forgot how to make things work and so it sticks to cliches and horrors. Naturally. Why bother? Nothing changes (for it) anyways.

Of course that logic takes for granted Russia propaganda bullshit that Azov battalion formed by Ukrainian nationalists is "Nazis". France has nationalists. Every single country has them. We have people who call themselves that right here. Mama Russia help, liberate! That's by the same people who bombed schools and maternity hospitals, razed entire cities and executed civilians in the eyes of the entire world in this century where all who can see will see. Nazi is as Nazi does, silly. No, there's no explanations only war crime tribunals. Stick all that mama Russia picturesque bullshit up you can guess where.

Then one of us has to be blind. Or stupid / both. I'm fine with duality. Of course, we should count Russians invading Ukraine and in Russia too as it became a national symbol all Nazis now - by very same logic. Does America have full right to invade and blow to pieces Russia now because they are all Nazis - according to you? Go figure (and do report on progress). Curious.

Sure it wanted to. Whole world has seen it and knows it by now except blind, deaf and st-d (concurrently). But I wanted to say something else: it takes being hopelessly blind to see nazis where there aren't any. And then one has to be stupid to assume that nazis has to be where your comrade friend has seen them. One has to be challenged super hard to find a grain of truth in anything Russia says when it decides to oppress and terrorize people. Only takes only a tiny bit of unobstructed vision, or independent thinking to see Russia's blusterous bullshit lies for what they are.

You're right of course. I misread. The whole seventy year long "never again" marching was all for nothing. Nothing learned, now a fact.

You have to be blind or ... s. Sorry nothing personal, the only logical options

Forgot, "intelligent"? Happens, too sad. P.S. I betcha the uniforms are mama Russia's own, the color all wrong but it's for the st..d anyways (yes, exclusively) so why bother?

By repeating Russia's own propaganda? It's below any intelligent being to waste a word and a minute of time on it - Russia produces lies in megatons, more and better than bombs, the two and the only her contributions to the humankind.

Some folks here are the funniest of all. Little doubt that Truedeaus are power-hungry demagogues; that Liberals have no principles only conveniences and a natural entitlement to govern, now fait accompli (for whatever it means - but nobody cared to think). They are the wrong people doing the right thing for very likely, wrong reasons (because as stated, no principles). But look at you: you do everything contrary to them, no thinking needed like a simplest binary robot. Trudeau turned right you go left. He only has to do the right thing for you to get it all wrong. Funny, or tragic go figure.

That strategy (sucking to murderous dictators, instead of stopping them) worked ever so well, just look! So why shouldn't we keep trying?!

Imagine if someone decided to spend a few billion $$$ in 1938 (comes to about a hundred in today's worth) to stop Hitler's aggressive ideas right in their bud? What an impossible, crazy thought!

Then WWII must have been alleged too. Allies should have stayed home and counted their millions when one day... what? Where's your blog, in the Nazis world?

It helps to brush up on history. Before "Russia" broke up it was called USSR, it invaded and massacred Hungary, Chekhoslovakia, Poland, annexed Baltic states and part of Finland and was one of the most obvious communist totalitarian states. Not to mention, killed millions of her own citizens. Some poor baby sure.

Wow wow poor Russia invaded and massacred all of its neighbors and all because it's bad bad West's fault. A psycho is envious just not working out so smoothly.

It cannot be apolitical but it, the effort certainly has to be non-partisan. Democracy works for the society for the citizens; while its imitations only or mostly for those involved with it. And if we aren't careful and vigilant it almost invariably ends up as the latter.

Before we can seriously talk about forming and choosing policies we need to create instruments that form actions and policies needed by the society and implement them in the reality, not only promises and talking head shows. That capacity has never been thought of; thought through; discussed; agreed and engineered in this country, ever. In essence we have post-colonial administrations divided into two cliques running the country for two centuries in a default, autopilot mode. That happy mode of public governance cannot and will not go on forever. First bells are already ringing ever louder. The only way forward that I could think of could be a new party of change with very much a sole mission of renewal and reengineering of political and public management system. Cannot be any of the default duo and a bit, simply not interested all is working fine as ever (for them). Does the society have a request for a meaningful change? There's only one way to find out. And the window will not be open indefinitely. Personally I think first past the post system should be among the first vestiges of the mindless past to go. It just isn't compatible with the complexities of the modern society and the world. If the interests of the society are not represented in the government, how could it act in it, the society's interest? We need to remember always that it's never a given and governments always have the default option - to work for themselves. But sure, would a great topic for a society-wide discussion once there's the party of change. Otherwise no point just another talking show.

But elections bring no change. Moreover, elections in Canada are almost bound to bring only more of the same. The system is carefully gauged and calibrated to maintain the status quo, to which any essential change is a risk and anathema. Why should it cost a fortune to register a candidate so that only two-three major parties could afford it? Why party execs decide who can be a candidate? Why supposedly "representatives" have no say of their own? In Putin's Russia there are elections, and only those who he likes can register. If you limit the choice to an absolute perfect minimum, you can call it elections but is it, in essence? Or more like Putin's at some point? The scale is clear: a modern transparent, open free choice democracy at one end and we aren't there that much is obvious. On the other, Putin's and other dictator "democracies" they learned democratic tricks of "elections", "judiciary" all looks nice if not looking close (and thinking of the meaning). And you are pushing and edging tiny bit at a time .. to where? There's only one destination. Who are you trying to fool?

Primarily we should be able to look at the reality objectively and not create impossible illusions. Parties and leaders do not create necessary change. Words are not tantamount to reality. We are seeing and feeling the difference daily. A working democracy is an instrument that translates objectives that were determined into the reality. It is not a formal process, document, rubber stamp proclamation from a tribune. It is not trivial or given for granted. It needs to be thought of, thought through, created and implemented so that it is sane, it makes sense it works and works effectively and efficiently for the citizens, not for itself. Just like anything you make for yourself it doesn't happen out of thin air. And we thought a democracy should? And that is a task way more complex than anyone here has given thought to in approaching on two centuries. We went with the easiest, cheapest and least thought flow to hand it over to post colonial bureaucracy and forget all. Sure it worked for a while because there's a lot of a country to sell and a lot of dough to spend. But all stories come to an end, those that cannot follow changing reality, grow, adapt and change. The mindless ride will not last.

Discussion is useless if there's neither will no instruments to act and make necessary change. If the default answer is no, what's there to discuss and most importantly: why (bother)?

The problem runs much deeper and it's right at the core of the system: we cannot elect many parties (majority, first past the post system prevents it); and we don't have independent representatives of citizens, only some grotesque cross of elected representatives - party employees. So there's no true independence anywhere in the governance system pretty much like in China. Party leaders have complete control over the party and can use near unlimited powers in a majority government. This is a dangerous setting as it settles into mentality and practice. And it creates a rigid hierarchical system that is a huge detriment to the quality and efficiency of governments just as can be seen. Modern democratic governments in this century cannot function this way. These proposals are far short of fixing either of the fundamental problems. In no way would they restore or rather establish true independence of MPs. But even they won't happen just watch. Why would they? Things are working just great as they are for everybody... at the trough. That's what we bought ourselves with decades and centuries of tired complacency.

We can set a checkmark for each: free independent media (no) impartial effective and competent judiciary (where was it when Emergencies was adopted - no) transparent and responsible governments accountable to the citizens (none). The country is not a modern democracy by any meaningful count, forget the ratings. Talking chats of useless heads (nothing changes - a fact) won't make it, don't be ridiculous. A happy mindless ride will not go forever.

Humans have this capacity: to never see something they don't like even if it glares them in the eyes. Nothing about Russia wasn't known since at least 2008, its invasion of Georgia. Eight years (eight!) after invasion and annexation of Crimea 2014, useless posturing and business as usual. Stupid will figure out that blind wouldn't see. Some time it could get us into real serious mess.