Moonlight Graham

So 2 years before the convoy, indigenous protestors across the country blockade railways in protest, no emergencies act invoked. At the Ottawa convoy, police at all 3 levels of government make no attempts to arrest or tow the truckers, including the ones at the border. Most of them are just making loud noises, none of them committed violence. Feds declare an emergency.

Why should the government support sports if people don't support it. That means people don't care about it. I definitely don't care about the CFL.

That's not even remotely how the legal system works, or the Charter. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of liberal democracy in this regard. You're literally describing 1984. Due process rights are among the most basic legal rights we have. Section 8 of the Charter (the 4th amendment in the US Bill of Rights) means the government does not have permission to snoop into your private life or property or your accounts/transactions with private businesses or seize your private property unless they have evidence to suspect you have committed a crime, and even then they have to go to a judge to get a warrant. This is to prevent abuse of power and arbitrary search or seizure because this is exactly what they did when these rights didn't exist. No reasonable person wants an RCMP officer to come into their house and go through their drawers because they just don't like the way you look, or because you gave them a suspicious stare on the street. They aren't even allowed to step on your property if you tell them they aren't allowed, nor any private individual. They aren't even allowed to search your car without consent, a warrant, or a crime happened. We don't have any reason to be afraid of them, Going into people's email accounts and tracking their movements is no different. Police harass & intimidate people enough as it is, many have fragile egos and go on power trips, as you know by following the news or watching Youtube. We should be surveilling police and government 24/7, not the other way around. They're public servants, police have no expectation of privacy on the job, they're accountable to us, not the other way around. Police and politicians commit more crimes than the average person. There's thousands of examples on Youtube of this abuse & harassment caught on camera. Due process laws exist because this is what government authorities did unchecked in the age of kings and queens where we had no rights, and what they do in countries like China & Russia. Government authorities harass people they didn't like, ie: journalists, annoying neighbours, political opponents etc, and confiscate property without reason. This is literally what they do today in China. We have shed blood to get these rights for ourselves after living like China does. I know all of this because I studied the history of legal rights at the post-secondary level. In our personal lives yes. But our only responsibility as citizens is to obey the law. The government also has the responsibility to obey the law. That's their right. Who is the arbiter of what is a "good" vs "bad" idea? The government? Silicon Valley? You? The marketplace of ideas means ideas exist on their own merit and people will judge them as "good" or "bad" themselves, with arguments and counterarguments free to be exchanged, they don't need smug self-righteous folks to think for them. We're grown adults. Most people do a pretty good job. Trump was not re-elected, most people got their COVID vaccines. Their ideas exist on their own merits. If they have no evidence for their arguments they can be rejected. You sound like an authoritarian dictator. Dictatorships don't work because one person is not smarter than the collective consensus of the majority of tens of millions to determine their own destiny. We're already better off without a forum moderator interfering in our affairs constantly. "Thread drift" has not harmed the other forum whatsoever, or this one. People don't need to be constantly controlled and micromanaged. Conspiracy theorists have their place, they are constantly questioning authority and are always investigating, they don't trust government or big pharma etc, they're our devil's advocates. I don't want to live in a society only made up of sheep who are always in compliance.

The public knows things that affect their daily lives, or easier to digest issues they read about. They don't have the time to understand the complexities of a trade agreement, but they should have some say. They don't, its typically done on their behalf by their reps without consultation or community feedback. Yes the world has changed. But we should still be in control. What has changed is technology, the ability to watch people and get into their private communications and movements etc are far easier. That means the laws need to change to keep up with the times. The government doesn't want that. They want the information so they can control the population how they want. There is a conflict of interest. If you MH are ok with giving up your privacy for security & public order or whatever other reason then you should have informed consent to do that. If you want to force me to give it up also without informed consent I don't think this should be for you or government to decide for me. I'm willing to risk less security for more privacy instead of living in a 1984 surveillance state, which can be prevented with a few clicks of a button. There's no difference in the gov going into someone's email account vs the filing cabinet in their house, or putting a bug on your phone vs creating a backdoor into Bell mobile infrastructure to listen to our calls. This gov doesn't worry much about security from foreign threats anyways, they only have started to care recently. They seem much more willing to clamp down on Canadians for security's sake than foreign threats. They think as you do. The devil is in the details with Digital ID and online harms laws.

The Democrats are corrupt. I don't know a major party that isn't. When has this not been the case? Bow down to our corporate masters. The Democrats and Liberal Party are made up of urban/suburban yuppies or gated-community progressives. Obama = suburban yuppie, Clinton/Trudeau = gated-community progressives. The Democrats now have a more socialist wing also, closer to urban/suburban populists than rich elitists. They think like university kids. The GOP are gated-community conservatives (Bush, Trump) or rural gun-toters (Palin), some populist but most are DC-insiders.

1. The economy and democracy works on the premise that its more effective and efficient that everyone is acting in their own interests. That people will make buying and voting choices based on what works best for them because only they can know how to run their own lives, instead of someone else deciding or guessing what they need or want for them. But there needs to also be some rules for people to follow sometimes to prevent exploitation and enforce agreements (contracts) etc. People need to be free to make their own choices but stay in their lane and not make other people's lives miserable or oppressed. Same with the government, we should not be micromanaged or watched 24/7. China and 1984 is not the answer. 3. We need some authority sometimes, for people to follow the rules, because good rules (or even rules of thumb) make a functioning society. Jordan talks about a balance between "order" and "chaos". His book is subtitled "An Antidote for Chaos". He believes we've swung too far into chaos in the social realm, and abandoned some important social traditions that gave our lives order and meaning. This has left many people adrift (chaos), without ways to successfully deal with some of life's challenges. But too many rules are stifling. People yearn to be free. The 1950's were too stifling, but drugs, promiscuity, mass divorce, tv violence kids are exposed to, pornography at our fingertips...has a free-for-all gone too far and led to problems? Has the pleasure-seeking led to happiness?

From my understanding of past discussions (correct me if I'm wrong Michael), Michael wants mass surveillance of everyone and to have it publicly accessible to everyone. Michael is big on transparency, not big on privacy or rights like warrants for search and seizure. Michael likes public order, and compliance to authority.

The Liberal ideological flaw is their arrogance, and self-righteousness. They believe they know what's best for everyone. They assume that people can't look after themselves. I find it patronizing. But we need to see the bills before we conclude these as examples.

I believe the CRTC is a force for good when it comes to encouraging Can-con. We need to protect our culture from American domination. We simply don't have the money or population to compete with the US 1-to-1. This is a reasonable limit to free speech with broadcasting. Foreign companies/artists do not have a right to unlimited broadcasting in Canada. Things illegal put online should be illegal regardless of publishing format. Serious threats of violence etc. I don't trust the Trudeau gov, they have shown they have some authoritarian-type leanings in terms of population control and mass surveillance. But its possible the bill is fine, we need to see the details.

Hospitals? That's a longterm solution. If we want a publicly paid healthcare system to work then we need to fund it adequately. In emergencies like COVID take on debt to fund it, then raise taxes temporarily when the crisis is over to pay for it. The reason medical workers quit is because the work was too exhausting, they mismanaged them. And they didn't raise pay to persuade them to stay. The system is mismanaged, horribly, and has been for a long time. This is what you get with rationed government-funded care. Central planning often sucks, and is also akin to slavery (if your kid is sick you're at the whim of government rationing, you have to leave the country to get treated). If it were me I would get rid of the public system. Everyone would get a ton of tax money back in their pockets to buy their own insurance. It would be sort of like the dental system, but better, and far better than the US. Extremely well regulated to prevent greed and abuse. Pick your insurance company. Nobody can be declined for any health reason. Everyone gets the same type of plan coverage & access to treatment, rich or not. Regulate costs, no gouging. The poor (including poor old people) get covered by a government plan. If you aren't poor and you don't have a plan the gov picks a private plan for you plus a convenience free for the trouble, and its tacked onto your tax return.

That's exactly what happens now though. A doctor's office isn't owned by the government. The doc pays the overhead, pays the secretary & nurses, and keeps the rest. Profit.

2. How would it be "private care" then? Private care to me is paying out of pocket or using private insurance. Uber-private would be that plus vendors could charge whatever they want. Me thinks a lot of elected members in the PC party don't really want to fix the system so people get fed up and become ok with some privatization. Mission-creep.

Isn't most healthcare outside hospitals privately operated but paid for with the health card insurance? Gov rates though. If truly private healthcare can charge whatever they want and charge it to the government, that sounds like a recipe for abuse.

Let's outsource all of this to America.

Tie Fighter?

A skirmish between the communist- turned- fascist tyrants in the CCP and the free world. Cold War all over again.

We also don't need our own country, the British will make our laws for us. Why bother moving out of the house either? Mom will cook me dinner and do my laundry until i'm retired. Why do I even bother wiping my own bum? If we're attacked by a much more powerful country, sure our NATO allies can help, that's what the alliance is there for. But its a balloon. We allowed another country's military aircraft into our sovereign borders to destroy a balloon for us, and in front of our biggest rival. This government is utterly incapable of defending Canada, proven over and over. Maybe, for once in our history, Canada can stand on its own two feet. We are conditioned by hundreds of years of history not to be.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/seven-years-after-vowing-not-to-purchase-f-35-jets-liberals-are-now-buying-them

I'm not worried, our Prime Minister Cry-Cry McFancysocks will protect us from the massive Chinese war-machine!

F-16? Aren't we still flying WWII planes?

US F-22's shot down the balloon that was traveling over the Yukon (Canadian airspace). This is so embarrassing. We can't even defend our own airspace against a balloon without America's help. IT'S A BALLOON! "I ordered the take down of an unidentified object that violated Canadian airspace. [NORAD] shot down the object over the Yukon. Canadian and U.S. aircraft were scrambled, and a U.S. F-22 successfully fired at the object," Trudeau said in a statement on Twitter.

More like self-destructive. But they don't even realize it. They think everyone is as tolerant as they are, but they aren't. And they are so nice and tolerant that they would sacrifice their own culture to accommodate other cultures. They are weak and submissive. They're so self-loathing they don't even think there's much worth defending. They will bend over backwards to help indigenous peoples protect their own culture, but protecting their own culture is oppressive, racist, and evil. One day they will turn around and little will be left. Post-national state. Chinese all move to Markham, and south asians all move to Brampton, and that's not racist. But whities move to Oakville and Barrie and its "white flight" and toxic racism. This is how they think. Riddled with guilt and self-loathing, double-standards for everyone.

In order for all racial groups to have more similar incomes you have to discriminate against the ones who do better than others. Same with the sexes. Equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. Any disparities in income or other socioeconomic outcomes and racism, sexism etc is assumed, without proper evidence. Bad, lazy social science. That doesn't mean racism and sexism don't occur. But you need to isolate the variables and prove a problem exists if you're going to start discriminating against people to fixed a claimed problem. And the goal should still be equality of opportunity, not equal outcomes.

If it will be used to track you they can suck it.

Racist discrimination against white people and sexist discrimination against men is legal in Canada, literally guaranteed in the Charter of Rights. Yay equality.