I’m not that fortunate, but I recognize it’s better for everyone else anyway.
Home ownership isn’t my retirement plan, I just want to own where I live.
In the end I’m financially fucked, it’s remarkable I got a nice house at a good price anyway.
I can’t hold a generation hostage over my finances. What am I, a boomer?
I, for one, would not mind if my property value stagnated or decreased so that others could have a better life.
But I’m not most people, nor am I in a decision-making capacity.
It’s also worth saying that I live in a single family dwelling on a larger than normal city lot, so I recognize that I am a part of the problem and still wouldn’t want to change the way I live.
Ah yes, the free speech of blocking highways with semi trucks.
From the “It’s okay to run over protestors” crowd. That’s speech to them too.
Law doesn’t work that way but I otherwise love the analogy.
The information takes little to reproduce, and information ‘wants’ to be reproduced.
Completely ludicrous.
They want to sell the product that, by nature, replicates itself, then charge their customers for their product continuing to do the thing it was meant to do, which is propagate itself.
These companies can go propagate themselves.
Thank you, I’m an outsider and didn’t know the who or why of the question.
I suppose it depends on why they don’t have security clearance. If it’s someone who could never qualify for it, that would need to be announced and explained.
If it’s simply a candidate who doesn’t yet have it, that’s something that should be known for the same reasons. They don’t have all the information other candidates do, but are operating with the information they do have.
You are absolutely correct, and my snarky reply leads toward this tendency to call an organization as a monolithic entity that has agendas when the actual issue could be any number of other things, probably all of them, in a quagmire together:
Resistance to change and outside pressure, factionialization within the group that leads to the request being impeded, corruption, organized crime, institutional failure, racism, nationalism, cronyism, outdated training, lack of training in general…
There could be a good number of people trying to comply with the policy and simply failing. We just don’t know the full truth.
But it’s probably all of the above.
Absolutely too easy on the RCMP as it mainly came down to “We don’t want to.”
One could also parse the longer answer as “We don’t do that at all. Well, not very much. And it’s better when we do. But we can’t prove that.”
In case the downvoters aren’t reading the article, it is also critical of the author’s claims.
They stream their games live on YouTube. My wife has been watching them despite no interest in hockey prior. It’s fun to watch.
Am I unaware of my own bias? No! It’s the women who are wrong!