Jump to content

Michael Hardner

Senior Member
  • Posts

    43,413
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    98

Posts posted by Michael Hardner

  1. 1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

    There is a simple solution.

    Drill baby drill. Leave farmers, miners and forestry alone. Stop spending money we don't have. Close the border.

    Do that...and watch the Canadian economy take off.

    Geopolitics plays a role though.  For example, We're not going to be allowed to trade with China freely if Trump gets elected.

    Close the Border means no immigration I guess?  Nobody's seriously proposing that.

  2. 2 hours ago, August1991 said:

    About 30% of Canadians eligible to vote pay no taxes whatever. (GST? They buy food, pay rent - get a refund.)

    For these people, any discussion of taxes (up/down) is irrelevant. They have no skin in the game.

     

    The odd thing about these people is that they're often discussed as though they have a 'free ride'  

    50% in Ontario is about $35K which gives you NET pay of about $2,200 a month.  This is the so-called 'middle class'.   This is the economy that the Trudeaus, the Chretiens, the Mulroneys and Harpers have given us.  

    https://www.thekickassentrepreneur.com/income-percentile-calculator-by-province-for-canada/

    • Like 2
  3. 3 hours ago, August1991 said:

    1. Lack of money? Paper? The world lacks paper? WTF?

    2. The world lacks skilled talent.

    3. For each human generation, we must teach so much.

    4. No human is born with the ability to write/read. Do math. Take a derivative. We must teach each child calculus.

     

    1. Money no longer has physical form.  This means it's theoretically unlimited.
    2. For what ?  We have AI now.  We don't have to do anything.  I recommend the 1960 version of HG Wells' The Time Machine.  The protagonist visits the future and it's an apt description of where we are going.  The human race becomes the Eloi people.

    "The Eloi are described as anatomically smaller than modern humans (standing roughly four feet tall), with shoulder-length curly hair, pointed chins, large eyes, small ears, small mouths with bright red thin lips, and sub-human intelligence. Their bodies are beautiful in appearance but surprisingly feeble. They do not perform much work, except to feed, play, and mate, and are characterized by apathy; when Weena falls into a river, none of the other Eloi move to help her (she is rescued instead by the Time Traveler). They live on a diet of fruits and vegetables, which may be cultivated for them by the Morlocks. Their language is described as "very sweet and liquid." The Eloi seem to dread only darkness and always sleep in droves within their "palaces". 

    3. My son taught himself to read completely at 3, via apps on his tablet.  I had no idea he was doing it.

    4. Our entire modern progress has been a project to counter the challenges to our existence - the bottom rows of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.  This means providing physical needs.  We now have to work on the top rows and stop pretending that we're poor.

  4. Quote

    The idea that the virus was released from a laboratory (accidentally or deliberately) appeared early in the pandemic.[28][29] It gained popularity in the United States through promotion by conservative personalities in early 2020,[30] fomenting tensions between the U.S. and China.[31] Scientists and media outlets widely dismissed it as a conspiracy theory.[32][33] The accidental leak idea had a resurgence in 2021.[34] In March, the World Health Organization (WHO) published a report which deemed the possibility "extremely unlikely", though the WHO's director-general said the report's conclusions were not definitive.[35] Subsequent plans for laboratory audits were rejected by China.[22][36]

    Most scientists remain skeptical of the possibility of a laboratory origin, citing a lack of any supporting evidence for a lab leak and the abundant evidence supporting zoonosis.[15][37] Though some scientists agree a lab leak should be examined as part of ongoing investigations,[38][39] politicization remains a concern.[40][41] In July 2022, two papers published in Science described novel epidemiological and genetic evidence that suggested the pandemic likely began at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market and did not come from a laboratory.[16][42][5]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lab_leak_theory

    It's not about Covid, the origin of the virus or anything like that.  It's about the Public Sphere and who is a legitimate thought leader and who isn't.  The end.

  5. Point of reference: Bombing civilians because of their government is a War Crime.

    https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes.shtml#:~:text=Some examples of prohibited acts,charitable purposes%2C historical monuments or

    "Some examples of prohibited acts include: murder; mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; taking of hostages; intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population; intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to religion, education, art, science or charitable purposes, historical monuments or hospitals; pillaging; rape, sexual slavery, forced pregnancy or any other form of sexual violence; conscripting or enlisting children under the age of 15 years into armed forces or groups or using them to participate actively in hostilities."

  6. 23 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

    1. Like I said, one disgruntled person does not warrant a public inquiry. When a panel/board of professionals has determined to end a study kowtowing to the disgruntled is a waste.

    2. Not sure what that means but, if I interpret your comment, the article seems to be troll bait then

    3. Value if is attains a significant cost is not value.

    1. When it gets out into the public then it needs some threshold of acceptance of the conclusions.  And that's new.

    2. We don't have to investigate whether Justin Trudeau worked with Robert Pickton to murder people, for example.

    3. Value means result for $.  So there is necessarily a trade off.

  7. 8 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

    1. I am sure there was a valid reason for halting a study after 4 year. Nothing nefarious, just no further progress was seen or noted.

    2 Well, no. Like I said, conspiracies come from suppositions and insinuations. I mean, look at what is happening in the Trudeau Rumour thread... LOL 

    3. Money and cost and expenses is always a factor. :) Costs a lot of money to bring a panel of medical, scientific and other experts to a place ot answer questions for =m laymen.

     

    1. Ok but the learnings of the past few years should tell us that the bar has elevated and we now have to work harder to get as much of the public to agree, and agree to disagree.

    2. The threshold has moved but we don't have to investigate troll bait or the system doesn't work.

    3. But you get value from it, is the point.

  8. 4 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

    1. Are you some way saying they were  "smoothing things over"?

    2. The article never even came close to insinuating that. Those are the kinds of insinuations that conspiracys come from LOL

    3. To ask for a citizens panel makes no sense. Why? To explain to laymen why professionals made a decision?

    4. Seems like in a time when we are whining about wasting money, having a public hearing to explain scientific and medical resolutions would be a waste of money and expert time and expense.

    5. The newspaper is for sure legitimate but the story is about one disgruntled neurologist and not the findings or research or outcome of the investigation..

     

    1.  Yes but not in a nefarious or sneaky way.  We can see with the public health challenges of the past five years, and science challenges of the past thirty that "the" public is getting more engaged and isn't satisfied with pat answers. 

    2.  No but you can anticipate what we're talking about here yes ?

    3.  Exactly yes.  

    4.  Money is not in question, but value is.  The mistake people make is to confuse the two.

    5. I would expect them to filter the story if there wasn't anything more behind it.

  9. 23 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

    1. WTF does a "citizen panel" know about medical and scientific things?? Give your head a shake.

    2. The government and a scientific "committee" had decided there was no merit after 4 years of investigation so, it did know better.

    3. You want them to re-open the case, spend more money to come up with the same conclusion because one pissed off guy wrote and email?? Shake your head real good LOL

    1. Nothing.  But they have questions and they constitute a 'public'.  I think panels, especially online ones, would do a lot to respond to disinformation and questions.

    2. What the government decides is usually in the interest of smoothing things over for better or worse.  We need to re-arm our public institutions for more contention and also leave things unresolved sometimes.

    3. The newspaper that looked into this is legitimate so it's worth asking, at least.

     

  10. 2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

     1.  But my guess is that he will look at reducing the number of immigrants to somewhere in the neighborhood of 300,000 to 350,000 and I'm basic that on what I think housing construction will look like by 2026, 2027 which is when he'll be making that decision. 

    You will have to be a little careful not to reduce it too suddenly because Justin has tied a lot of the economy into excessive immigration and if you cut that suddenly it can have repercussions on the industries such as universities.

    Having said that I guess it also depends on what you mean by substantial. A 10% cut is actually relatively substantial. I don't think it would be enough but I think there's no doubt that it would have substance. I think overall across the board over a. Of time as new rules come into effect it'll be approximately a 25% reduction, maybe slightly more. But that's it I don't think we're going down further unless the housing construction market fails completely

    1. Ok, well I appreciate that you saw fit to expound o nyour thoughts here.  I am going to save this post and we'll check in after we have PM PP.

    • Haha 1
  11. 14 minutes ago, myata said:

    The Guardian today on the New Brunswick brain disorder:

    Top Canadian scientist alleges in leaked emails he was barred from studying mystery brain illness

    Why is the country so prone to botching these cases like every single one or them, or very close? Could there be a simple, logical cause?

    So which one would it be? It can't be both, together and in the same place, obviously.

    Well, seems like both Federal and Provincial were involved in this and an independent committee disagrees with the scientist too.  They should have at least kept the investigation open, though, from the sounds of it.

    • Like 1
  12. 8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

    1. Do you though? because The list included reducing immigration to sustainable levels and you seem to have forgotten that.

    2. Still struggling with basic comprehension and logic i see. 

    3. The fact that it won't be that hard Doesn't mean it won't have a big impact.  

    ... It's entirely possible for it to be both easy and impactful to make change.

    4. As I noted, your buddy's the Liberals ...

    5. So yes, I absolutely expect substantial reductions in immigration both permanent and to a lesser degree temporary.

    1. I did a search on some keywords to remind myself of people's positions. I found four posts from you that talked about what you think would happen. I didn't remember anything beyond that so that's why I did the search. I didn't see anything in there but immigration which is why I asked you to clarify. Thanks. 

    2. 4. You accuse me of struggling because I don't remember some specific post you made a year ago? And yet you keep saying I like Trudeau despite multiple corrections. That seems like a contradiction. 

    3. Agreed and I hope He's successful .

    5. I expect some cuts but not substantial. I think the max I would expect would be 10%. Do you care to put a number out there? 

    Please understand that I'm not arguing with you at all on here, since we are only predicting things. There's no argument to be made until the facts come down in a couple of years.

     

     

     

  13. 15 minutes ago, myata said:

    With understanding, there's no need for hate, see?

    Great post.

    The root of the problem is a theme of coddling and perpetual affirmation that tells folks they're never wrong.  You see many posts on here (RePolitics - which is ostensibly a forum for better dialogue) delegitimizing entire viewpoints and cultures rather than talking about solutions.

    It's a symptom of politics' degeneration into angertainment and insult sports.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...