Jump to content

Is Canada becoming a Communist state?


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, cougar said:

1.7 children per woman is not below replacement rate.

Look at it this way.  Your parents have 2 kids, in 20 years their 2 kids have another 2 kids and so on, a 20 year cycle (could be a 16 year cycle in India) , so if everyone lives 80 years, from the time your parents gave birth to you and your sister, till the time they die, there will be 6 people coming out of 2, so a net gain of 4, in other words the population tripled.

"According to the UN Population Division, a total fertility rate (TFR) of about 2.1 children per woman is called replacement-level fertility. If replacement level fertility is sustained over a sufficiently long period, each generation will exactly replace itself."  - wikipedia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Apparently the Charter of Rights does not apply in every situation in society.  One legal company says it applies with regard to the federal government.  The same source says private companies can censor comments and that they are under the jurisdiction the CRTC (federal government).  This sounds very Marxist or authoritarian.  People are worried about C10 and C36 controlling speech on the internet, but it sounds like the federal government is already controlling speech through the CRTC.  So where exactly freedom of expression in the Charter applies is not absolutely clear.  There may be a lot of situations where Canadians are not protected by the Charter, which is kind of concerning.  Canada may be on a path of steadily taking away the freedom of it's citizens by ever-increasing regulations, bureaucracy, laws, and tribunals.  This problem is made worse by many people who think other people's freedom of expression should be curtailed or banned if they do not agree with them.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cougar said:

Not a myth, a reality.

the math disagrees and your feelings are of no consequence

you told me to present the data and I did

the data didn't fit your narrative 

so naturally cognitive dissonance set in and you moved the goal posts

because you cannot let go of your Malthusian bias

just as I predicted

facts don't care about your feelings

and your feelings don't care about facts

Edited by Yzermandius19
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

the math disagrees and your feelings are of no consequence

 

There was no math in your presentation.  Some numbers which , for all I know are not trustworthy.

One thing however is for certain, nature's math don't lie and it will not care about your mistakes or your feelings.

Edited by cougar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

"According to the UN Population Division, a total fertility rate (TFR) of about 2.1 children per woman is called replacement-level fertility. If replacement level fertility is sustained over a sufficiently long period, each generation will exactly replace itself."  - wikipedia

I revised my narrative above , but not because of reading wikipedia - I did it after doing my own more in depth analysis.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, cougar said:

There was no math in your presentation.  Some numbers which , for all I know are not trustworthy.

One thing however is for certain, nature's math don't lie and it will not care about your mistakes or your feelings.

when the math says what you want it to say, then it's trustworthy

when the math doesn't say what you want it to say, then it's not trustworthy

you argue in bad faith

NPC City

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The facts say that 1) the world's population is growing at above 1% and 2) the rate of growth has not come down by a half in fifty years. Now what are you trying to prove here, with math and definitions? That it may come down to zero at some point in the future? That is not the point though. The point is how may years (not decades) we have before the music becomes loud and clear.

By the way, 1 percent of 7.8 billion is 78 million. That's right, plus two Canadas, annually. And we are still struggling how to get to even partial sustainability, with just one, with natural riches of a continent and in 160 years. How's that for the math?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blaming others is not a solution, it’s an absolution. Politicians don’t elect themselves, the electorate elects them, and then we start doling out the blame. We can’t send media creations to Ottawa and expect competent politicians to arrive. Whatever Canada is becoming, it starts with Canadians.

There was a time, not so long ago, we may have been able to engineer a better future if we were lucky enough to vote for statesmen. Not anymore. Today, we need problem-solvers. Words aren’t working. No Newfoundland fisher has ever talked the crew’s way out of a storm. No prairie farmer has ever negotiated away the devastation caused by bad weather. They both have to navigate their way through banks and buyers – as every other business owner – before the benefits can be realized.

The problem solvers we need are plentiful and in wide distribution. They are Canadians from coast to coast to coast. They are in every riding in the country. Furthermore, they don’t source historic, well-documented (marketed) solutions for problems with surface similarities, they create proper solutions on the fly using experience-based knowledge. Information for them is a starting point, not the solution. We can no longer afford to be overwhelmed by loose-fitting, impressively-accurate statistical solutions that are beautifully presented and completely unsuitable.

Soon, Canada will be getting a crash course in reality. Neither the environment nor the economy can be tricked by vacuous political glad-handing, empty promises or smiling celebrities generated as required by media. The upcoming challenges will create opportunities for any party that presents realistic, comprehensive options riding by riding; a party that respects and appeals to thinking Canadians. There are far too many to ignore. Those opportunities do not include parties handing out fairy-godmother promises more suited to a past that never existed or an electorate that acts as if they just won free shopping at the bank.

I hope the difficulties we face will cause us to realize this great country was built by Canadians working together. We need Canadians to guide the future if we are to have one as Canadians. The biggest bang for the buck will come from elected representatives listening to those who will be providing those bucks, not those who propose ways to spend them...many times over. If parties are unwilling to offer proper representation for Canadians, then Canadians need to elect independents. At least they would not be committed to doing as they are told by the party elite.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Scallywag said:

... then Canadians need to elect independents. At least they would not be committed to doing as they are told by the party elite.

Most of all Canadians need at some point to start thinking and taking responsibility for their democracy. For now, its been 160 years of sailing on auto pilot programmed by someone else.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, myata said:

The facts say that 1) the world's population is growing at above 1% and 2) the rate of growth has not come down by a half in fifty years. Now what are you trying to prove here, with math and definitions? That it may come down to zero at some point in the future? That is not the point though. The point is how may years (not decades) we have before the music becomes loud and clear.

By the way, 1 percent of 7.8 billion is 78 million. That's right, plus two Canadas, annually. And we are still struggling how to get to even partial sustainability, with just one, with natural riches of a continent and in 160 years. How's that for the math?

the earth isn't running out of resources, they are finding more everyday

the actual carrying capacity even with today's technology is well beyond where the population will before it begins to shrink

Malthus was wrong, get over it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

the earth isn't running out of resources, they are finding more everyday

the actual carrying capacity even with today's technology is well beyond where the population will before it begins to shrink

Malthus was wrong, get over it

Obviously this is just you saying it. In the meanwhile, we're already in the negative territory as irreversible changes have been triggered with just one world's population (1970) to which we added another one and on the way, in the next two generations to add one more. It isn't science or rational argumentation, not even informed optimism just wishful thinking while keeping head firmly in the sand.

- catastrophic loss of biodiversity; extreme temperature and climate events; massive deforestation including old-growth forests in Canada; permafrost melting; loss of glaciers; loss of coral reefs; accelerating warming of the oceans; facts; facts; facts; with ostrich position those post-apocalypse movies can just be self-fulfilling prophesy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

when the math says what you want it to say, then it's trustworthy

when the math doesn't say what you want it to say, then it's not trustworthy

you argue in bad faith

NPC City

I argue that you presented no math.  I will not be looking in Wikipedia to find out the definition of math, but I am sure it will mention something along the lines of logical principles, calculations, formulae etc.  Showing a number, supposed to be the answer of your mathematical conundrum is not Mathematics.

What I presented was more along the lines of math, except I made the mistake of using a starting point, when I should have looked at a window of time.

 

Edited by cougar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few weeks ago I made a controversial comment on a BC Liberal MLA's Facebook page.  Shortly after I made the comment, a spy bot came into my computer and started searching every word on the screen, highlighting the words in yellow as it moved.  I shut the computer down.  Within the next few days, he posted a photo of himself standing with an RCMP officer on his FB page.  Were these actions meant to intimidate and terrorize or just a coincidence?  Would this be classified as state-sponsored intimidation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, blackbird said:

A few weeks ago I made a controversial comment on a BC Liberal MLA's Facebook page.  Shortly after I made the comment, a spy bot came into my computer and started searching every word on the screen, highlighting the words in yellow as it moved.  I shut the computer down.  Within the next few days, he posted a photo of himself standing with an RCMP officer on his FB page.  Were these actions meant to intimidate and terrorize or just a coincidence?  Would this be classified as state-sponsored intimidation?

You should probably assume a new identity and move to New Zealand.  Or Peru.

Somewhere, anyway.

Have all your teeth removed first.  You never know...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

You should probably assume a new identity and move to New Zealand.  Or Peru.

Somewhere, anyway.

Have all your teeth removed first.  You never know...

Probably, but I'm too old to consider that.  Will stay here and take my chances.  No point in voting in this deeply messed up country.  Those other countries are worse by the way.  Never trust politicians.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, blackbird said:

A few weeks ago I made a controversial comment on a BC Liberal MLA's Facebook page.  Shortly after I made the comment, a spy bot came into my computer and started searching every word on the screen, highlighting the words in yellow as it moved.  I shut the computer down.  Within the next few days, he posted a photo of himself standing with an RCMP officer on his FB page.  Were these actions meant to intimidate and terrorize or just a coincidence?  Would this be classified as state-sponsored intimidation?

If true, this will be the ultimate proof the country is becoming a communist state (the way you interpret it to be).

Actual Communism is something different that people here know little about.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 7/23/2021 at 11:40 AM, Scallywag said:

Blaming others is not a solution, it’s an absolution. Politicians don’t elect themselves, the electorate elects them, and then we start doling out the blame. We can’t send media creations to Ottawa and expect competent politicians to arrive. Whatever Canada is becoming, it starts with Canadians.

There was a time, not so long ago, we may have been able to engineer a better future if we were lucky enough to vote for statesmen. Not anymore. Today, we need problem-solvers. Words aren’t working. No Newfoundland fisher has ever talked the crew’s way out of a storm. No prairie farmer has ever negotiated away the devastation caused by bad weather. They both have to navigate their way through banks and buyers – as every other business owner – before the benefits can be realized.

The problem solvers we need are plentiful and in wide distribution. They are Canadians from coast to coast to coast. They are in every riding in the country. Furthermore, they don’t source historic, well-documented (marketed) solutions for problems with surface similarities, they create proper solutions on the fly using experience-based knowledge. Information for them is a starting point, not the solution. We can no longer afford to be overwhelmed by loose-fitting, impressively-accurate statistical solutions that are beautifully presented and completely unsuitable.

Soon, Canada will be getting a crash course in reality. Neither the environment nor the economy can be tricked by vacuous political glad-handing, empty promises or smiling celebrities generated as required by media. The upcoming challenges will create opportunities for any party that presents realistic, comprehensive options riding by riding; a party that respects and appeals to thinking Canadians. There are far too many to ignore. Those opportunities do not include parties handing out fairy-godmother promises more suited to a past that never existed or an electorate that acts as if they just won free shopping at the bank.

I hope the difficulties we face will cause us to realize this great country was built by Canadians working together. We need Canadians to guide the future if we are to have one as Canadians. The biggest bang for the buck will come from elected representatives listening to those who will be providing those bucks, not those who propose ways to spend them...many times over. If parties are unwilling to offer proper representation for Canadians, then Canadians need to elect independents. At least they would not be committed to doing as they are told by the party elite.

How do you propose that we all work together when this nations is so divided, shit we can not even agree on how many genders there are, the left and right can not sit down at the same table and talk about the issues at hand, almost every topic or issue we have in this nation we are deeply divided. So how do we get everyone to sit at the same table... other than gun point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2021 at 5:19 PM, Army Guy said:

How do you propose that we all work together when this nations is so divided, shit we can not even agree on how many genders there are, the left and right can not sit down at the same table and talk about the issues at hand, almost every topic or issue we have in this nation we are deeply divided. So how do we get everyone to sit at the same table... other than gun point. 

Was there ever a time that everyone agreed with each other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...