Michael Hardner

1. 2. 3. 4. None of this has anything to do with free speech other than maybe you getting ejected from the meeting. But I am curious as to the stated reason... Anyway, thanks for trying. Inclusion is an important social message to teach the next generation. Your opposition to it is noted, I suppose.

Do you have an example for us to discuss or is this just your opinion ?

That's a symptom of a system that needs reform and it is a problem. But I was talking about the system not individual doctors. Doctors themselves are unjappy with the system.

1. Yes. 2. I know how the devil came into the public imagination but it's not relevant to 63% of us so a non-starter. I was brought up deeply religious and theistic. 3. Fine but you still have to deal with me as a member of the public. So you can spend your time trying to convert me if you think that's my core problem. Respectfully, I'm well past being converted. 4. I don't consider anyone on here an opponent. Not even trolls and chuds.

1. What ? That's ridiculous if true. The system depends on feedback from the basic publics: patients and the public, ministries and governments, healthcare workers. 2. This is exactly the problem. Harper tried to address this. But then people don't even know what CIHI is. They track how well or not-well services are. 3. Why does it work in other domains ? Why does it work in France ? Why does it work for pizza ? There is supposed to be a feedback loop. IF people are unaware that it's even possible to have one then it's hard to imagine them asking for one. 4. See #2. https://www.cihi.ca/en When Harper started trying to move things forward with CIHI, I posted on here about it a lot. Unfortunately, the function of politics as a kind of online entertainment supplanted any useful discussion and so we have chud vs chud...

1. I reject your premise outright. 2. If me rejecting your idea right out of the gate is "discussing it" then sure... but it's not going anywhere. 3. I don't care. It's not a basis for discussion with the public. 4. I have developed ideas of the causes that don't rely on faith. I don't share yours so there's no point in discussing it, again. 5. 6. It's all nonsense and superstition. Respectfully, you have to take your private faith out of the discussion if you want to move forward. I checked. This says 37% of Canadians believe in Satan. I'm stunned but it's still a minority. https://news.gallup.com/poll/14083/divine-subjects-canadians-believe-britons-skeptical.aspx#:~:text=When it comes to the,believe that the devil exists.

1. Yes. How can France - a nation with a union mindset - outdo us in public healthcare including lower costs ? 2. With respect, the public is part of any public healthcare system so there is some responsibility on the public engagement model in how things are done. I don't think asking the public for vision of future public healthcare models is an exercise that tells us much... aside from "people are unhappy". Does the public even know about CIHI ? Stephen Harper gave it focus, as I recall, as a way for "the" public to get information about service delivery. And still the only argument I ever hear is public vs private as though there's no other thing to discuss. 3. Again - if the public doesn't pay attention ALL the time, vs during a crisis, how can we expect good answers ? 4. Commissioned polls by unheard-of institutes are actually currency of past discussions and not helpful We aren't France but if we are going to have 2-tier then we have to be more like them in our publics as well as our delivery. Otherwise the lower tier will go to garbage immediately. I would tie the top tier to IMPROVED service levels on the bottom. IN other words, if people can afford to pay more then that money will be used to fund public health too. I don't care who provides the services but clearly new organizations need to be developed. And unionizing them is cheaper than contracting out.

Satan is a fictional character. So this is a thought exercise but not done for any reason of exploring or discussing with people who disagree.

The hard left and hard right... Don't agree with that. But I do. The guy engaged in a pre-World war II. Land annexation gambit. We don't want to throw the clock back that far. Increasing your personal wealth by bombing civilians... no.

Also would have sealed its victory. But there is a contention that Bill Clinton promised something along those lines, but it was withdrawn.

Ok but the Dems aren't the poster children for staying away from foreign wars. Kennedy and Johnson had Vietnam, Clinton and Carter funded and deployed third world wars. The theory of containment is alive and well. That's why we find proxy wars... Russia was never going to be a NATO partner.

This is a Murdoch publication.

This is going to rock the liberal world once people become aware, because it acknowledges the culture war assertions if the so-called Chuds, ie. That doctors are not taking proper steps to counsel children. I have been following this as a critical issue for the public sphere for awhile. But it needs to be a starting point to disassemble liberal chudism.

Because the arguments and public input Are absent and Canada does not have a management mindset. We discussed Public services in terms of should they exist or not?

He wrote a whole book. Praising Franklin Delano Roosevelt. You have to understand that a certain point socialism becomes conservatism because there is a type of conservative who praises social programs as holding up status quo. This of you but I have even been accused of being on the left from time to time. .. In terms of taxation, we all have to take a pragmatic view of how to pay for programs without discouraging investment. That's all. It would be nice though if we could imagine some new way of making the world better that doesn't look backwards at Old solutions. A neoliberal YouTuber I follow talked about publicly funded housing developments that are making 10% return. That's happening because developers have become too fat and turned down anything without a guaranteed 20% return. At that point, the system fails. Fails. Adam Smith's invisible hand test

There's a performance aspect to being Opposition Leader. He's doing well also capitalizing on world events. Many disagree.

Sometimes I give my toddler chocolate for breakfast, just so we can move on.

How is he doing a good job? His job is to convince people he'd be a better PM than Trudeau. Don't you think Trudeau is carrying most of the load on that project? His responsibility is minor as opposition leader. It will be higher soon.

Low level of comment... You're on the same level as people who liked Trudeau for his hair. Really, You should stop posting here.

1. And -> we DON'T KNOW 2. Why? Why? Why?

Clinton's worse but there are other cases for both. And the current case is about campaign finance rules. And... who cares...

Good question but more importantly, what are they doing?

1. Well, you can be pessimistic if you like but these wars will end at some point, and I would rather look back positively at what I did. 2. Uh....

1. Question from 3 hours ago: "Do you seriously think just restructuring a failing health care system would fix the problems?" Question from 11 minutes ago: "The government and health authorities have had years to re-structure the system and don't appear to have done so. So why would they change now?" Can you not see how these are different questions ? Are you the kind of person who hates being questioned and/or corrected ? 2. You can ask that directly. I think that we would do well with two-tier if we had a public more akin to France's with respect to inspecting/monitoring services. 3. There's restructuring and then there's RESTRUCTURING. 4. And thanks for yours too. Believe it or not, I think we're more close than apart on these things. 5. Yes, I think people should be fired for not doing their jobs. I also think culture makes workplaces terrible and that's the hardest thing to fix. A manager who has only worked in a bad environment can't be expected to fix things on their own. Working productively and challenging yourself can be fun - whether there are unions there or not. I could run a team with union members, and have revived the careers of more than one so-called useless employee. ----- Religious rant: Despite what the unions say, people want to work. And if you provide a good environment you will get good results. Money actually adds fog to the issue as you end up getting people who hate their jobs but can't quit. The best thing that happened to my general happiness was when my field (IT) got globalized and I went from making 6 figures as a young man to not being able to find clients. This happened years before the web became a thing... Eventually "the market" found me again and I work to better myself and make the environment challenging and productive. If it turns bad, I can quit and get a new job right away.

1. You have changed the question to "will restructuring happen" ? That's not what you asked before. 2. They have these things in all health jurisdictions that I have seen. How can that be the root cause of the problems then 3. Not true. Sometimes I don't reply at all. If I think it's a waste of time then I won't. Until then, be thankful for my time.