myata

Now that you said it, please check the post of this Wednesday (i.e. three days ago) in the "Vaccine passports" thread, you may recall it because you commented how scary the numbers looked. I didn't make a screenshot but memory rarely fails me and I can tell for certain what it showed: in the rubric "in ICU due to Covid", 7 fully vaccinated, 5 partially, zero non vaccinated. No mistake, I and you and maybe some people on this board saw it. And now let's look what it's showing today (same site same rubric): https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data. This is ICU not like one gets in and out right away and it's been, to remind, three days. Not into conspiracy theories however this stuff is real and the question is, what is it? Is it Orwellian already or just still oh so new, not to worry? Honestly I couldn't care much but will be reluctant like h%ll to trust any data from these sources without additional verification.

I'm not interested in scary-cheerful blah-blah-blah with zero factual evidence. We were told that vaccines were effective against variants and it's not some quantum world there a claim and its contrary can be true at the same time. That muzak can be played forever and no, I'm not interested, just pass on.

Essentially, what the data on vaccination efficacy, over 90% prevention of hospitalizations tell us is that for the vaccinated, the risk of serious Covid should be comparable to, or lower than that of the flu (feel free to make the calculation but that would be my guess). And no one went head over heels crazy about the flu, there were no quarantines, lockdowns, mandatory masking rules, etc. Of course, this is a new thing and dropping all measures at once may not be wise, but this should still be the clear direction, not dragging them forever just in case of another wave. And we can start with those mandatory blank measures that had the weakest base in the evidence, such as masking in well-spaced environments at very low and low levels of infection. Some countries did that and some provinces too and the sky has not fallen, it's just a matter of common sense, as well as professional responsibility and accountability.

One has to look no further than this very Re-politics site. PMO, Privy Council, Treasury board - this is all about how the bureaucracy works, not how the democracy works. 160 years devoted to development of bureaucratic hierarchy and function with none, to democracy? What else can be added in essence to, elect a dictator and let them run as they desire with no responsibility or oversight for so many years, and in the worst case you can try to remove them next time around? If it exists, shouldn't it be on the site too?

This time Ontario is way above last years numbers, at which time, obviously there were no vaccinated. It makes it very unlikely that vaccinated do not transmit - it would mean that less than a third of population makes several times over the cases of the last year and such a dramatic shift would certainly have been noticed by the research community. And that removes all grounds for mandatory, and imposed vaccinations. With great majority vaccinated (we have close to 70% and children will add more) remove all restrictions, vaccinated people are protected and unvaccinated ones responsible for their choices, like drinking, smoking, drugs etc. Nothing is essentially different in this case, unless proven by facts. And now let's see what actually happens. P.S. with reports of suppression of information in scientific circles some may want to reserve their judgement till more representative data is available.

Interesting. The country is run top down by hand as in the 18th and 19th centuries, without transparency; responsibility and accountability while the challenges of this century like climate change, economy, housing, overpopulation and others are just ahead. And there's no way to change anything, one tiny thing, "Senate reform", "election reform" no no all has to remain exactly as it was back in 1867. Is it a good plan? If nothing happened in so many years does it mean that one could sail forever oblivious of the reality. All good questions, but who answers?

Immediate and direct accountability, such as effective parliamentary investigations as events are happening rather than decades after. Are you going to pay for an expensive renovation to get some results (if any) decade later, sorry that's just the way it works? Sponsorship scandal happened a full decade after the events and we, the public still doesn't know full details about SNC and WE affairs because no independent investigations were held. Sure I would not involved with imitations of democracy, and why would anyone waste their time and efforts on that? A real democracy begins with the question where all authority in the country originates from and how it is held responsible and accountable to that source.

The democracy in the country is in the dire state. The most problematic is that there's neither avenues nor working mechanisms to bring it up to date and renew it. This condition is worrying and at some point can become scary.

If you're curious, in another thread someone posted a reference to a scientific, peer-reviewed bona fide study cited in The Lancet that stated just that, for "influenza-like illness".

People like monarchy, pageant, carriages, amour stories, gossip columns in colorful magazines. But the bureaucracy needs Majesty for another and very logical reason: as a shield between the responsibility, accountability and the people. See, "Her Majesty's pleasure" that's who we serve and please and are accountable to (for all She/He cared, in an independent foreign country, works for us though). A hand move that transforms real, direct and immediate responsibility and accountability into abstract, hypothetical and very remote ones. Such a simple trick and so effective, for centuries. "We serve Her pleasure", and you, just foot the bill. What? It worked and works! Takeout: a democracy without active, involved and intelligent citizens cannot exist and would not exist. If one likes to be fooled and looking to be fooled they will be fooled. If one couldn't care, will be fooled. But look at these pretty pictures in the magazines.

1. In theory or in reality? Then examples can be shown and not exceptional once in history but on a regular basis, as required by the situation and the society, that is supposed to be the job after all, not cutting ribbons. For example, sponsorship scandal, SNC and WE scandals merited and required parliamentary inquiry that never materialized. We can paint all kind of pretty pictures but it doesn't mean the contraption will work in reality and for quite obvious reasons as already stated - conflict of interest and loyalty. 2. "... each member of Cabinet is appointed to serve at Her Majesty’s pleasure" true, that can be the ultimate source of confusion if repeated too often and without reflection. In a democracy there's only one subject that is the principal and ultimate source of all authority. And without thinking one inevitably comes to that choice, majesty or democracy. And after centuries of drifting without thought or direction it may very well be too late to begin fixing anything. "Senate reform", sure. "Election reform" but of course.

In the second and third waves, case counts beat those of the first wave setting all time records, with mandatory masking policies in place that were supposed to make difference. We should not repeat the same mistake with the vaccines. With close to 70% of population vaccinated, plus children over 12 coming, if vaccination is effective it should already provide strong protection that will manifest itself in statistics - we only need to wait couple of months to see it. If the cases stay low, the effectiveness of the vaccines will bring levels even higher without any forced measures. And if for any reasons it would fail to materialize as with mask, the time will be not to jump, cry wolf again and again, and impose all kind of mandates but to observe and think. These are not the same, and the results are different too. By the way Israel with one of the highest rates of vaccination is reporting a surge of cases with calls for further lockdowns. Deja vu? From lockdowns to vaccination and back again?

Sure, how can one unaccountable, not transparent, without any meaningful checks and balances and independent oversight and with near dictatorial powers between elections, government be worse than the other? Oats or porridge dear, porridge or oats? That simple song stops working with an average human child around the age of three, but have worked flawlessly in this country for well over a century.

I already explained one cannot be an independent representative and an employee of the party boss at the same time, this is quite obvious conflict of interest and loyalty. If there are no independent representatives in the Parliament, it cannot be independent branch of authority. If there is no independent branches then checks and balances cannot exist. If there's no independent oversight of the executive branch then accountability of the government is not possible. Question then: is it still a democracy? How can it be, without independent oversight, checks and balances and accountability? Sure this is Canada, the question is though what is the political system of this country in truth and in essence, not just pretty words: a democracy? Or colonial authoritarian management system with hastily glued elections for appearance of democratic legitimacy?

The bureaucracy in this country takes for granted that Canadians will set the checkmark of legitimacy on its near-unlimited rule. The only chance it would notice the citizens any other time is if voter participation would drop below 30% or better 20%. But what would be the chance of that? Nothing any longer matters. This makes no difference to me and for me.

That may be general idea but in this country all ruling parties appear to be perfectly fine with big lazy governments with minimal if any, meaningful checks and controls by the society. Like Harper's $50 in the hand any better than Liberals multibillion spending, while under any banner MPs, ministers and directors keep on raking % on % raises.

I don't like the result: that purported "representatives" are in fact, employees of party offices And that majority PM (and minority too) can shut down any inquiry at will. That is not how a democracy was supposed to work and that process has no meaningful outcome as far as I'm concerned. Nominated sure, got to sit in the chair and push button good for them but how it's got anything to do with me? If I needed to occupy time and meet people I'd rather go cycling in a group. It's better for the environment, good for the health you meet new people beats any time. Politics in this country sadly, degenerated into a club game for its own sake, little to do with concerns and interests of people.

I see no fun there, it's only as funless and boring as is grotesque and outdated in this century. And by now we should know all about "inputs" a majority PM needs (minority one too, most of the time) to shut down inquiries by "independent" "representatives" / employees. Maybe they could alternate, if only for a change? - one day representatives, next employees at least would be some difference.

In my opinion, this has little to do with ideology or political spectrum. More like it's the final stage of evolution of bureaucracy free of all checks, controls and accountability, bureaucracy that manages itself, plans itself and is a thing in itself. That's how it started back in Confederation times and at first surely it was trying to be rational, effective even and for awhile of course the way it understand rationality (residential schools) and efficiency, in the absence of feedback. But invariably it develops its own view on the world, and in the absence of feedback, shake and synchronization mechanisms it begins to dominate. Things must be done only that make sense to the bureaucracy and only the way bureaucracy does things. And then at some point the detachment is near accomplished. On the banner it works for the citizens, but in fact it does not need any citizens it has everything it needs and wants for as long as it sees (while bottomless pocket lasts too, but it doesn't like thinking that way). And (weird again, but thanks) to the pandemic we know that this point is somewhere very near - if not behind us. And we haven't even started in earnest on the climate.

At some point it may be a "championship" with no spectators. And nobody would even notice as the system needs citizens only to place a finger once every so many years thank-you and why you're still here?

I can see that in the minds of some words have become the equivalent of physical reality. XYZ billions spent so fixed for generation. Next item. "We think / say so you are". OK that's hardly a surprise upon centuries of social evolution. Not pushing any theories or making any connections here, only observing: 2018: Pot legalized in Canada 2019: Covid-19 2020: Travel from Wuhan 2021: Fall election, 2021. Right, how could one forget, "fixed election dates"! See, in the legends of legendary Canadian "conflict of interest" politics, the "law" of fixed election dates was broken by the same PM who promised to introduce it! Maybe because the "law" read something like "yes, of course they are fixed, certainly fixed... until unfixed by the sitting PM". There, enjoy your dates! And for that worthy piece of ... "work" "representatives" were paid well entitled (aka obscene, in the common language) entitlements sorry, digressing. And now Canadians are dutifully going to the polls (with their masks etc as before) but has anybody asked me? Nope PM figured it out, thank-you, just sigh here and here. We just had our pandemic but how would it deal with the climate change? Wake up to "not to worry, please put on your full oxygen suit and line up for mandatory boosters to vaccinations" morning muzak? Doesn't sound too out of this world anymore... does it?

The omnipresent and ubiquitous conflict of interest seems to be a hallmark of Canadian politics. "Representatives" - employees, independent branch of authority - employees of the chief executive, "independent" oversight by own appointees and very good if not employees, non-competitive contracts to employers of family members, and of course, formal head of independent state representative of a foreign monarch. Has it just happened this way, or was designed on purpose? How could one design that on purpose, if, presumably, designing a democracy? Or so that one could never tell with any certainty, in the total absence and working and functional checks and balances and independent powers, which act is proper and where was a transgression? For a century and some now this type of democracy, but in fact, colonial authority taken to logical limit; managed by hand by a hierarchy of officials accountable to no one; with minimal, once in years exercise providing a token of democratic legitimacy; worked anyhow in the environment far removed from the mainstream events of the world likely in the richest country in world. But will it be successful in the new times with their unique and far reaching impacts on all aspects of our lives? Can it be?

Installing democracy where there's no underlying foundations in the society rarely works, there's only a handful of examples. Now that's an important lesson to ponder about. Appearance, visibility of democracy may not be the same as strong and functional democracy. No it doesn't have to be, nobody promised that.

The political system in Afghanistan, supported for a decade by Western powers in the hope to create a functional democracy is collapsing in our eyes like a card house. This is of no big surprise, though the rate of the process, after all the investments and efforts, can be. Pseudo democratic system constructed in Afghanistan is based on and reflecting foreign principles and models, a thin wrapper ostensibly legitimized by once in so many years elections. And it has so little relevance to the reality of a regular family on the ground, with its performances, obscene by the regular standard of living in the country paychecks, and why not, corruption. So when a threatening force rose why would a regular citizen answer mobilization call? Who is there to defend, and what? Could there be some parallels there for way more developed societies, ahead of hardly avoidable turmoil of precipitous and severe climate change likely to bring massive changes to natural and social environments? Who would you defend, it case of future threats and challenges, natural and man made? On paper "representatives" -party employees (please see the Act: "representatives" for the folks in the colorful brochure, whereas "employees", for the package) with obscene remuneration packages way beyond even remote reference to the reality in the country? Unlimited expense accounts of figureheads of state? Unlimited and unconditional powers of PM to create apparent only, not to worry (though how would one know, with "employees" in place of independent representatives?), conflicts of interest and shut down "parliamentary" inquiries? Theatrics of the "question period"? Does it, the system, work for the citizens still, or mostly/only needs them once every so many years for apparent legitimization? I'm not talking about the country, but political system, democracy if it can be called that in the full meaning of the word. Is there still more in this country's democracy for you to support and defend if and when needed, than for the Afghans in their?

And who would be surprised it would come to that, if questions aren't asked and explanations not forthcoming? Then, an apology two decades later, possibly with compensation out of taxpayer's (never own) pocket. We get only what we are complacent about, and why would there be any surprises?