No, being “impartial” would be highlighting both the number of covered and not covered so the reader appreciates just how many people the UCP wants to leave behind. “Big number is bigger” is not how impartiality is measured.

My favourite was this bit:

Poilievre said many Canadians already have access to drug coverage through workplace plans that may offer better benefits than those the NDP-backed Liberal plan eventually could offer.

A 2022 Conference Board of Canada report found that about 24.6 million Canadians are already enrolled in private drug plans.

Disappointed in the CBC here. What they should’ve said is that over 15 million people are not enrolled in a private drug plan, as most people won’t do the math and 24.6M people seems like a big number.

Moreover, many of the people most in need of drugs–the elderly, disabled, and those dealing with chronic health conditions–are far less likely to be employed and have access to coverage.

deleted by creator

My Momentum 4s have 60 hours of battery life…

Didn’t actually read the whole piece did ya? Just stopped at the first paragraph and then reacted?

It’s fine, at this point I’m sure you’ll go find something else to pick apart to protect your ego, meanwhile allowing the point to escape you entirely.

I just hope if/when you get scammed, the people around you are less of a dick about it.

It can happen to anyone:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/02/05/cyber-dunning-kruger/

Cory Doctorow didn’t just fall off the back of a turnip truck. If it can happen to him, odds are it can happen to you.

when taxes have increased dramatically since then too

No they haven’t:

https://policyalternatives.ca/publications/commentary/have-taxes-changed-all-much-over-past-half-century

In 1961, families paid 33.5% of their income on taxes, but by 1969 they were paying 39% and in 1974 they paid 43.4% of their income. So, if you compare the 2009 effective family tax rate to 1961, you will find a 25% increase, but you will only report a 7% increase since 1969 and an actual decrease since 1974.

(Note this analysis is circa 2010, but things haven’t changed substantially since then aside from the post COVID inflation spike that’s still subsiding).

But enjoy the alternate reality brought to you by your “friends” at the Fraser Institute™️.

But spending cuts in the 1980s and 1990s, along with a move to put more responsibility for economic and social well-being on the shoulders of individuals, caused low-income Canadians to fall further behind, the report says.

So neoliberalism. Neoliberalism happened.

Who could’ve guessed.

Lol as if the Canadian Construction Association wants infill. Their members are responsible for the municipal lobbying that leads to sprawl in the first place, and I all but guarantee you their infrastructure cost estimates are assuming traditional suburban residential growth

So sure, this person may have a point in that supportive infrastructure is not being adequately accounted for. But I don’t believe for a second that they’re interested in what’s actually best for Canadians.

What?

Compiling quality datasets is enormously challenging and labour intensive. OpenAI absolutely knows the provenance of the data they train on as it’s part of their secret sauce. And there’s no damn way their CTO won’t have a broad strokes understanding of the origins of those datasets.

Absolutely. I have over a dozen pairs, both from the 2017 eclipse and the annular last fall, and you can bet I’ll be reusing some while giving away the rest.

The most obvious problem with their comment is the dismissive, holier-than-thou tone.

They could have made their point by suggesting non-disposable alternatives: finding a local viewing party with shared equipment, preferring reusable glasses, or safe alternative ways of viewing like pinhole cameras or projection techniques.

But no. It’s much easier to sneer on an anonymous forum while stoking that sense of superiority instead of actually offering something constructive.

As opposed to your world changing contributions of bitching online to random strangers?

Keep fighting the good fight. I’m sure you’re just one more post away from saving the planet.

Oh fuck off with the mindless cynicism.

The amount of plastic used in those glasses, which is only in the lenses as the rest is card paper, is a fraction of what’s in typical disposable consumer goods. I guarantee you’ve already thrown out more plastic in the last week than is in a whole ten pack of those glasses.

Meanwhile, events like this are a great way to remind people of the natural world we live in and how miniscule our experience of it is relative to the enormity of even just our solar system.

All excellent points, and you’re right, I really meant “simple”, not “easy”.

My comment was really intended to highlight the narrowing of the solution space regarding housing. When houses became products and investments, we collectively decided the government had no place in building them aside from indirect nudges: zoning, various forms of incentives, etc.

Maybe it’s time we accept that the free market has simply failed and we need to look beyond neoliberal orthodoxy for solutions.

That’s not an easy shift! Not at all. But IMO it’s a necessary one.

As an aside, it’s not like this is new. “It’s a Wonderful Life” highlighted this exact problem. Their only mistake is they assumed a benevolent capitalist (George) would come along and fix the problem. But that ain’t how the real world works.

This isn’t an easy solution. It took us 40 years to get into this mess, and it’s going to take a good while to get out of it.

No, there’s a very easy solution: the government should build housing the same way they build roads and bridges.

Housing is societal infrastructure. Leaving that entirely to the private sector never made any damn sense.

The QAnon Anonymous podcast, which critically explores conspiracy movements in general, is worth checking out if you want a deeper dive into Didulo and the broader conspiracy movements she’s connected with. They have a couple of episodes dedicated to her particularly, but also cover things like the sovereign citizen conspiracy theory that she trafficks in.

She’s been around for years and has been thriving in QAnon/sovereign citizen/COVID conspiracy theorist circles without the media coverage.

Shining light on this nutjob is not going to make things any worse, and it’s about time normies came to understand the crazy in their midst.

Take it to an electronics recycling center. Seriously.

If you already have a homelab, you plan to replace it, you don’t want to repair it, and you don’t have an obvious use case for another machine (it’s just another computer; you either have the need for another computer or you don’t), then holding onto it is just hoarding.

If somebody wanted to draw animated kiddie porn they could still do that. How far would you go until you ban crayons

It’s genuinely impressive how completely you missed my point.

How about another analogy: US federal law allows people to own individual firearms, but not grenades.

But they’re both things that kill people, right? Why would they be treated differently?

Hint: it’s about scale.

The same is true of pipe bombs. But anyone can make a pipe bomb. Genie is out of the bottle, right? So why are there laws regulating manufacture and ownership of them? Hmm…