Quebec’s used it for decades. Provinces could use it to ‘notwithstanding’ PP anti-trans legislation at a federal level if the conservatives get in next time around.

I don’t think your issue is with the mechanism, you’re just not in favour of how Alberta’s using it on this particular social issue.

Not sure what you mean, can you elaborate? “In theory” you can contact the CB if there are erroneous entries under your name, though to see those you need to get periodic CB reports to see what all is listed there… which can be a pain in the arse to fetch. I admit I’ve never personally had to cancel/dispute anything though, so I’m not sure how easy that process is first hand.

My personal pet peeve about credit scores in Canada, is that they’re all maintained by companies with ties to US parent companies. Equifax is a good example, where tons of sensitive information gets submitted, and it’s potentially within reach of the US govt. As an anecdote to clarify why this bothers me – I recently worked for an org that submits regular data extracts to equifax for credit bureau purposes. There was an error on a submission that required fixing. They told us they were going to charge us ~$20k to correct the error (which is crazy, as the org was a small business). We pushed back, basically pointing to Canada’s privacy legislation that states we as an org have an obligation to inform other orgs of issues/mistakes, and that they have an obligation to fix it. As part of that, we asked them to confirm they were in compliance with Canadian privacy legislation.

Instead of answering, they dropped the $20k bill and fixed the mistake.

Relatively minor breach, honestly. Name, address, phone number – all things that were historically available in a phone book, and are difficult to use to steal an ID (ie. no CC’s, no SINs, nothin like that).

You can ask orgs to delete your personal data, and they ‘should’ so long as its not retained for legal reasons (eg. tax stuff). That said it doesn’t really matter, as once the data’s out, it’s out. Most people I know in Canada just assume that their basic details are leaked, period, due to the volume of leaks reported in Canada annually.

The ones to watch for are CCs and SINs, really. CCs as they can directly impact your wallet, SINs as they can get used in ID fraud / setting up things like loans in other cities.

For CC breaches, you just call in and cancel the CC and get a new one. For SIN breaches, I think there’s a process to replace a SIN, but Im not sure, and I imagine its got a hefty wait with the govt / lots of bureaucracy. You can mitigate the ID theft risks by getting Credit Reports periodically, and/or signing up for regular ones with Equifax or whoever. When getting a credit report, I’d suggest checking how its getting run, as if you go through a third party it could translate to ‘hits’ on your credit score.

This is an absolutely stupid take, especially considering the rough evidence we can literally see with our own eyes at this point.

Vancouver’s housing prices are down ~4% this year, and have been edging down since ~2022. Rents have also been coming down, ever since the liberals reversed their policy on immigration.

“It’s the banks!”… bullshit. It was the immigration situation, with 99% of our population growth from immigration, housing supply couldn’t keep up, and locals got priced out. House prices and Rent prices have reversed course ever since they massively clipped immigration. We need immigration, of course, but not at the levels that the Liberals had jacked it up to for so long.

I don’t think I’ve made any passive aggressive comments – most/all of my replies are briefly noting the other posters aggressiveness, and then expanding on points I’d made to try and clarify, in hopes that the other poster would grow up, or to allow them to continue to lob personal attacks to highlight just how baseless their position is/was. After recognising the other persons a .ml, and the reputation .ml has, I realise there’s likely not much point to it though.

All of your responses to me have just been thinly veilled passive aggressive insults that don’t refute anything that I’ve said.

You seem overly triggered that I found the teaser off-putting, so much so that you’re conflating what I’d initially stated and what I’d used later as an explanation of how teasers work.

I basically noted that the person is padding in useless words, and that they were referencing highly contested concepts as though they’re pre-defined/determined (twisting). It’s the kind of stuff I used to see in first year student papers back in uni. Like even in the title, there’s no real purpose for using “reality of” when you can just say “Contemporary Canadian Imperialism”, the attempt to expand that out and tether what’s fairly likely a subjective article to what most people consider ‘objective’ (reality) is just academic obfuscation. If this person had an editor, they should’ve been underlining stuff all over the place.

Even more, it’s a piece published by a US University that seems pretty clearly to try and foster animosity amongst Canadian demographic subsets and to paint Canada in a negative light. Funding for this sort of article, its publication and distribution, at a time when the US is aggressively targeting Canada with economic warfare and making statements about annexing the territory, is at the very least questionable.

Aw, are you hurt that I don’t think your linked article is worth reading, based on having gone through and read the initial intro/‘teaser’ for that article? What did you think that initial teaser is meant to be used for, if not to gauge whether or not the whole article is worth a read?

It’s like providing a free sample of some food product in a store, and the person goes “yuck”, and now you’re getting all pissed off and saying “well you didn’t eat a whole serving size before going yuck, so you clearly have no taste!”.

If you’re involved in peer reviewed work, you should have thicker skin to criticism.

Man, even just the intro to that reads like the author’s straining to sound theoretical/padding, like first year students who think adding as many big words as possible equals a “smart” paper. The base premises are so convoluted, and twist so many terms in weird ways, that I have absolutely zero interest in reading the rest.

who the heck is marlaina?

I like some of what he’s saying, hopefully he can reclaim some of the vote for the ndp if elected. I’m not sure who the other contenders are though, and itll most likely end up as a demographic politics type party again just pandering to different niche minority group interests.

I’m not totally sure what the postal banking system he references is, specifically. I’ve never lived in a remote area, which it seems is where it was more commonly used. But like, 99% of what you need to do with a FI you can do online these days, hell many options are online only with no physical retail locations. I get a feeling that postal banking is basically just an old person “I dont wanna use that internet thing!” type of issue, in which case I wouldn’t support it. The oldest generations who are most opposed to updating their skills are also the ones that pulled up ladders/profited from the younger generations current gong show – they’ve had enough charity from the public purse.

Besides, feds always seem to forget that many small communities have credit unions, or that credit unions are already there as an alternative to the big banks for most financial service needs. If this guys really about smaller communities/local financial options, he should be bolstering the CUs as an alternative to the banks (though cus are under prov jurisdiction).

If they’re doing speaking tours, I hope the audience is treating it like “Interview with a war criminal” and asking questions probing the mental state of genocidal shock troopers.

Honestly, I imagine that wealth taxes would be difficult / cumbersome to actually implement in a fair way – and they’d likely get significant challenges.

A more traditional approach, that I believe worked fairly well though I’m not totally sure, is to jack up inheritance taxes. Much easier to apply a tax on wealth during a wealth transfer, as all items get accounted for at the time anyhow.

Another approach that would likely dramatically shift things, would be to alter how stock market securities get used to secure loans: regulate banks to prevent them accepting securities at value. Doing that would turn off the ‘tap’ of money for many rich people, and instead force them to liquidate some capital to afford their high-service lifestyles. Ie. Cases like Musk, where you see the “richest man in the world” taking out loans using his stock as collateral in order to pay for stuff, shouldn’t happen: make him actually sell his stock to raise liquidity.

so idk, i think there are options beyond just those two.

Not surprising given the hiring spike under Trudeau. Like since 2019 public sector jobs increased at roughly double the pace of private sector, and had gotten to the point that public sector job characteristics skewed national averages on things like wage growth.

So stats like the increase in national average incomes/wages, was largely driven by gains for public sector employees – ones who’s salaries are paid by the collective taxation of primarily private sector employees. It’s sorta like seeing a spike in people demanding food, but no change in the number of farmer’s supplying that food – if the supply doesn’t catch up quick, you’re going to have less people (or at least, increased cases of hunger/starvation). Some people need to go back to farming, if you’re going to keep an equilibrium. Especially if the people eating, have gotten union-pushed food/plate increases, have become significantly more numerous in comparison, and are getting far more of the total food supply by percentage produced.

Significantly increasing taxes on the rich might help, though I imagine it still wouldn’t be enough to support the recent increases in public sector costs. That’s sort of moot though, as the gov in general is loathe to increase taxes on the rich.

Except genetics is taking a backseat to science in some cases. Cases that are normally considered cheating. Except for a small minority where they’re allowed to do it. Like if you were to show up to a gaming LAN party with a ton of hacks/mods, because you were bad at the games being played, you’d be a cheater. Even if you try justifying it saying you’re bad at those games, and that you need computer science bots to help make you better at it, you’re still entering in to the competition with an unfair advantage and not competing with the other players in a fair way. And even if other players beat you, you still cheated and made it a lot less fun for anyone who lost to you in the process. And to demand that the competition completely change how players are sorted / paired, so that bot players/cheaters get representation and can participate too, totally undermines the whole point of the event.

Idk. I agree that it’s theoretically possible to implement some sort of max T level via medical sources or whatever, but that’s totally impractical for most levels of the sport, I would imagine. It’s a huge hurdle to put for event organizers to meet, in order to include a very small sub set of the population. There need to be some limits on that, otherwise the cost / effort to put on events for anyone becomes intolerable for organizers/administrators.

I don’t see an issue with this, personally. I’d also broadly agree with the idea of banning all beauty contest competitors who’ve had plastic surgery, under a similar principle. An organized competition around physical traits should not be significantly influenced/determined by a doctors risk tolerance / skill pre-competition.

Doesn’t stop people from doing the activity either way, if they enjoy it. Structured competitions require some rules and restrictions though, to keep things fair, beyond just being ‘equitable’ to minorities.

Whether he’s winning these things or not is kinda moot, too. Like the article notes that he’s met ‘soft guys’ at competitions that are more passive/seem less toxic. Men, as a gender, have all kinds of different testosterone levels – some are below average, but still strive to compete / participate in these events. A trans guy being “set” at a doctor prescribed “medium” level, would seem like he’s being given an advantage over all those “soft” guys. I can’t imagine many of those ‘soft guys’ would be thrilled to hear they lost to an x-woman on drugs in a competition often related to masculinity. I mean, why shouldn’t they also get that edge? Why should Canadian healthcare policy’s lopsided treatment of testosterone supplements between trans people and straight people impact the outcome? Doesn’t seem ‘fair’ for the soft cis guys.

Anyone have a link to a data piece that highlights demographic info about the infected population?

I’m curious to see if the low vaccination rate / infection rates are primarily amongst an unvaccinated religious group, recent immigrants (who may’ve come from countries with lower vaccination rates), etc. With our population growth being entirely driven through immigration – like even with the scale back lately, it’s still 92% of our population growth – source countries/cultures may matter.

Canada usually has absurd amounts of demographic info easily available, but my little bit of googling turned up nothing on this one, other than articles saying there’s no data…