Michael Hardner

I think I was working at their headquarters at Brampton for a while. There was a lot of old Canadian Legacy at play, clearly, in the stiff bureaucracy and the plodding slowness of their decisions. They were doomed anyway. I want to add, pointing fingers such as trying to examine philosophy of causality and free choice is kind of a waste of energy. HBCs management failed. Musk kills children. Some things just are. You can scratch your chin and contemplate the universe all you want but it's not helpful, any more than over-moralizing does.

Pretty sure there is a recession coming.

Yeah maybe? I've all missed the obvious part....

Trusting any politician, especially with something that can't be verified, is a naive activity.

I mean it's a matter of numbers. As I said lots of people did better with freer trade and now when it's at risk of pulling back we see a recession so....

Excuse me? My premise? I don't think I posted a premise on this topic here in the thread. Maybe you intended to reply to someone else like eyeball.

1. More pedantic nonsense. I'm going to move on now.

1. Removing funding for programs that save lives. 2. It's wordplay. I think we know what I mean. One factor in a set of events leading to death. 3. That's a straw man isn't it? Sorry I don't have time to engage in days long pedantic arguments, such as what does "what" mean? These changes have trade offs, and that's obvious. So if you are preparing for a later argument by nitpicking, then just start that argument now and save us time...

No, that it's a crisis 🤣

1. You already stated that and I already responded. 2. Not killing people but causing deaths... 3. ... he is part of the causal change that leads to their deaths but not responsible in all senses. 4. The devil is in the details. If there is a single death that comes as the result of USAID cuts, then my point is true. Then we can talk about how much care should be taken when reviewing operations on this scale. Suffice it to say, as a caveat, that nobody will have the answers on these things, either here or in the room where the decision is made, either before or after the decision.

I guess that's what the architect is happy about then.

Because it takes a lot of training and skill to understand it? This is part of the problem, in our current epistemic crisis, is that people think that opinions are knowledge. Evolution will eliminate people who drink bleach because a big man tells them to. Just FYI.

People will die because of indiscriminate cuts to programs. People will die because Musk record will proceed recklessly. Maybe not as many Americans as foreigners though. But I believe it's going to happen.

Theoretically I agree. I think DOGE is a stupid hammer, but if it sheds light on complex issues like procurement, depreciation and efficiency then it could be worth ... something. I do believe people will die though.

How so ? Doesn't the plan, as it's being executed, at least resemble Project 2025 ? At least more than the 2016 plan ?

Of course not. If this was accepted science we would have heard about it.

You look for reasons to be offended 😔

A cartoon is a drawing. Can you at least acknowledge that I backed up your post?

You posted a political cartoon! Are you insane that you can't recognize facts? And my entire post was to say that you were right. Seriously... Do I have to put you on ignore for agreeing with me?

I highly doubt that you spent The time to check the claim in this cartoon. Anyway, I did it on your behalf. 100% true. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-63681617 Sure... This is happening globally as of 2020 when this report was created. Thanks to globalization. It's not happening within countries like the US and Canada necessarily.

Which rules specifically? The economy grew substantially with globalism. Clearly people were doing better. And not just the top wealthiest top earners the real estate sector doubled in size, which meant investors big and small.... Real estate agents, renovators, home furnishing sales.. Are these people all against globalism?

I doubt it 😕 Maybe these things are related though. I suspect Trudeau was a philanderer with amazing cover-up skills on that front.

So... The thread title is now negated?

I think that they do have such defences but no matter.. can any further defenses be added at this point? What can be done?

Wasn't the system already designed to prevent this from happening? It was supposed to allow an informed public to elect leadership that would pursue their best interest right? If so or if not, then what happened and what should happen next?