Slashdot Mirror

But then again, it may not...

Here in Ontario, Canada, we raised the minimum wage from $10.25 to $11.00, and unemployment went down in the following months and year, from around 7.5 %to 6.75% (source). While that doesn't prove that minimum wage increases never result in unemployment rises, it does disprove that they always result in unemployment rises.

As others have pointed out, Canada made a small change and saw small changes in unemployment. It would be quite hard to measure the effect because so many other things changed at the same time. As a counter-example, Seattle seems to be losing jobs as Washington state gains them. It's still early so we don't know if this trend will hold.

Finally, I don't know any economist who asserts raising the minimum wage will always raise unemployment. At most they'll say that holding all else equal, that's a likely outcome. Problem is, it's virtually impossible to hold all else equal. It's also entirely possible employers adjust in other ways, such as cutting overtime, reducing benefits, reducing staffing, or increasing automation. Or they may raise prices or cut their profit margins. As it turns out, those last two are very hard to do in highly competitive markets (and many low-wage markets are also highly competitive).

But then again, it may not...

Here in Ontario, Canada, we raised the minimum wage from $10.25 to $11.00, and unemployment went down in the following months and year, from around 7.5 %to 6.75% (source). While that doesn't prove that minimum wage increases never result in unemployment rises, it does disprove that they always result in unemployment rises.

Minimum wage increases killing jobs is a ridiculous notion - prices can always raise as well, and besides, the naysayers repeat this line almost Every. Single. Time. - even for overdue inflation-indexed increases, which generally casts doubt on their positions. In reality, it's a lot more complicated than that.

I will never understand why minimum wage is not tied to inflation rates - this is a ridiculous argument to have Every Five Years.

http://www.thenation.com/artic...
http://www.thestar.com/busines...
https://www.weforum.org/agenda...

But then again, it may not...

Here in Ontario, Canada, we raised the minimum wage from $10.25 to $11.00, and unemployment went down in the following months and year, from around 7.5 %to 6.75% (source). While that doesn't prove that minimum wage increases never result in unemployment rises, it does disprove that they always result in unemployment rises.

Minimum wage increases killing jobs is a ridiculous notion - prices can always raise as well, and besides, the naysayers repeat this line almost Every. Single. Time. - even for overdue inflation-indexed increases, which generally casts doubt on their positions. In reality, it's a lot more complicated than that.

I will never understand why minimum wage is not tied to inflation rates - this is a ridiculous argument to have Every Five Years.

http://www.thenation.com/artic...
http://www.thestar.com/busines...
https://www.weforum.org/agenda...

Gee I wonder how I got this wrong?

http://www.itworldcanada.com/a...

https://www.thestar.com/busine...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... (and the section below about LTE)

well the guy below mentions Nazis, but gets downvoted because of the extreme example I'm assuming... but here's a quick google of more
'regular abuse by scientists'

http://www.thestar.com/news/ca...

http://www.documentary.org/mag...

And heck, I'd be willing to wager that scientists as a whole working with children... perhaps in anthropology or sociology abuse children the same as priests, UN peace keepers... And I'd also wager, their colleagues turn a blind eye to it just as every other group.

Scientists are pretty regular people.

Yes, the US is just like North Korea. WT...F!!!!!!!!!? I'm guessing you share a brain cell with your cousin, and it's his turn to use it today.

Try reading some time instead of talking out your ass.
Idiot!

This, exactly. Questioning your government spending money on economic migrants posing as refugees is legitimate -- "NO HUNGARY GERMANY YES"? If you're fleeing from a warzone and still have the ability to choose

Why would they want to stay in one of the worst dictatorships of Europe, close to rival Assad's Syria? People are already fleeing Hungary, why should the poor Syrians be forced to remain there, cramped into concentration camps with the Gypsies? http://www.thestar.com/news/wo...

Oh God, not this line of crap reasoning again.

This guy killed every person at a house party with a knife.

33 dead in mass stabbing

87 dead in Happy Land arson attack

44 killed in school bombing

Why is it so hard for people to understand that the tool is not important? In fact, the tool in the most deadly of the above attacks is was a match and some gasoline. If you read that article, you'll find that he resorted to this after not being able to get ahold of a gun. Yes, you read that right. Had he gotten a gun, the likelihood is that FAR FEWER people would have died.

What was that Paul Newman movie from the late 70s?

The greatest hockey movie ever, Slap Shot.

The Hanson Brothers!

https://www.thestar.com/conten...

That sounds suspiciously like the beginnings of a totalitarian regime. Probably why the liberals got a 'surprise' win

Actually, in the previous election, Harper Regime told the national media that they were limited to five (5!) questions per day.

In that election, the media barely squawked about it, and the Globe and Mail ("Canada's National Newspaper") even endorsed the party that told them that!

Worse, Canadians gave them a majority win putting them into a far, far stronger position than they'd been in prior to them being found in Contempt of Parliament - which triggered that election.

I guess my point is that not only should it have been a definitive win (it was), but it should have happened 4 full years earlier.

That it wasn't clear from the writ dropping that the Harper Regime was going to be wiped out (and the fact that it wasn't actually wiped out) is still pretty discouraging and shows that Canadians' apathy runs pretty damned deep.

I think Conservatives assume all other people are as stupid as they are.

I think it's worse - they know how to get the stupid vote but they aren't stupid themselves (well, not all of them). It's pure Machiavellian manipulation.

I'll never vote for another one as long as I live.

While I agree mostly, it's entirely possible that a GOP of reasonable conservatives arises from the ashes of self destruction that the current lot seem intent on inflicting on themselves.

Get rid of Gerrymandering & get campaign finance reformed, in a couple decades there might well be a conservative party worthy of consideration.

And what's worse, is that your donor barely gets enough money to buy crappy Apple products.

I didn't realize that Chinese prisoners were allowed to have electronic devices...

The Toronto Star version mentions that they took very few naps.

The TPP isn't a free trade agreement. What it does do is give corporations pre-eminence over nation states and the right to sue in secret courts, if the states are deemed to have adversely affect the earnings of the said corporations. Similarly to how Canada was sued under NAFTA by a private company for trying to build a second bridge over the Detroit River. Canada's chief crime being the attempt at protecting the environment and the health of Canadians. So we can all stop the pretence that our governments actually represent the interests of the citizens.

Why you should care about the TPP

Well I'm not antinuclear but Ontario wanted to build a couple of new reactors and they had budgeted $10B for it but the only compliant bid came in at $26B. This was in 2009.
https://www.thestar.com/busine...

I'm all for Green Energy, but sometimes it makes your blood boil.

In Ontario, Canada, we have a similar problem. The government promised Wind and other producers guaranteed prices well above what is needed.

So we have an oversupply of electricity.
Then, we have to give that power away. Adding a bit of humor. We actually subsidize electricity in the US and neighboring provinces to take our excess electricity.

http://www.thestar.com/news/qu...

This is largely deranged, because at the same time as they talk of excess electricity, we're always being told to conserve. But anything we conserve is just given away below cost to others and we end up paying higher adjustment costs anyways.

Glad to know the electricity market is screwed up everywhere.

In general it's difficult to get excited about Canadian issues, since the news and commentary from our US neighbors tends to be a lot more loud and extreme. However, there are a couple commenters I turn to when I want to catch up on what is happening in my own country:

Michael Geist is an excellent source for tech and intellectual property issues in Canada.

Chantal Hebert is a fantastic political analyst... her columns are regularly insightful and devoid of the partisan screeching that seems to infect a lot of political commentary.

One of the problem is that copyrighted works can sit on a shelf for 100+ years and it doesn't cost the rightsholder a cent. So yeah, sure, increase copyright terms. Please. At zero cost, even a trillion-in-one chance of a work-on-the-shelf ever making any kind of money is still better than zero.

Even a use-it-or-lose-it system won't work, as you'll see extremely-limited runs just for copyrights' sake. NOT any other.

A proposal is to limit copyright to (compared to the current situation) a very limited time, say 10 years, with an optional extension -at a fee and with registration- for another 10 years. This would total 20 years, the same as inventors get to exploit their ingenuity and creativity at the cost of filing for a patent. This would level the playing field between the two, open up a gigantic public domain, and still give creators a full 2 decades to exploit works.

The most vocal opponents of this proposal will be: (1) the copyright industry, (2) "made men" (dead or alive) that somehow still cash in today for what they did many decades ago and (3) the Hordes Of Entertainment Lawyers that make a good penny with all the legalities, paperwork, clearances, etc. that comes with the actual use of copyrighted works.

I don't want my kids (or grandkids) to get this information from poorly equipped teachers who have 30 new kids to raise every year.

We hare having this debate and protests in Ontario since the government came out with their updated curriculum.

There are some against it for many different reasons. I don't really worry about them because they'll probably teach their kid someday or wake up really fast when their kid says their pregnant. It's the vocal minority i'm worried about which seem to be Muslims and other religious groups. They will never teach their kids these things and perpetuate the idea that women are belongings. These are the ones who come up with pure FUD such as

"In Grade 1 they will learn to reveal their private parts (not just name), they will see posters and flash cards of private parts, they will learn to touch the private area and identify it on themselves and others."

Canada went through an H1B-esque abuse scandal in 2013 where Royal Bank of Canada tossed their IT department out on its ass:

http://www.thestar.com/business/2013/04/11/rbc_chief_issues_open_letter_apology_to_canadians_over_outsourcing.html

More recently (2014/2015) there was a huge story over abuses by several big chains:

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/news/tim-hortons-foreign-workers/

I don't see how any one incident of corruption proves anything. Do you honestly think that it doesn't exist in your system. You think you have no corruption?

http://www.thestar.com/news/ca...

Found that in about 5 seconds of looking.

You don't have a right to not catch diseases from infected people.

Actually you are very wrong about that. See the many cases where people were locked up because they knew they had diseases and spread them around by not taking basic precautions. Someone already linked you to Typoid Mary, but what about the constant cases of people being jailed for unsafe sex while knowingly carrying HIV.

We have a right not be infected due to stupidity / malicious intent; anti-vaxxers fall under both.

Did everyone forget that many CEO's show signs of psychopathy? (now called something more P.C., like antisocial personality disorder) Some sources:
Forbes
Patheos
arts.mic
thestar

Is anyone really surprised that CEOs don't show the slightest regard for the well-being of the lives they can impact the most?

If you speed when you know what it's going to cost you, consider the costs like a lottery ticket - a tax on stupidity. Your argument about "most of the time" makes no sense - most of the time I can cross the street without looking both ways. And your excuse that "others are doing it" is an argument I would expect from a child, to which parents answer "If your friends jumped off a cliff, would you?"

Look how stupid what you siad sounds:

Since the ACTUAL DAMAGE done by a single incident of speeding is almost always zero, with a few fantastically bad results, the average is what is being targeted- but that average is still hella low. Since the proportion of enforcement to bad action is so bad.

Playing Russian Roulette with a loaded gun follows the same rules - most of the time when you pull the trigger, there's no damage whatsoever. Also, you have no right to potentially endanger others by speeding. It's not all about you. Don't want to pay the fines? Don't speed. It's not that hard.

Also, most rapes aren't reported. We saw proof of this with the #BeenRapedNeverReported tag.

This might be fairly common as this was reported in Canada a couple of weeks ago.Family finds message in last Kellogg’s box made at London plant

Yeah, they do shoot -- http://www.thestar.com/news/cr...

Canada has a no-fly list -- http://globalnews.ca/news/1801...

And I'd take Obama over Harper in a heartbeat.

That said, hells yeah, big gaming convention in town? My kids and I would be all over that.

Thus as we hear about judge after judge giving their blessings to insanely unconstitutional behaviour, and we hear about watchdogs that aren't watching keep in mind about who vetted these people in the first place.

I'm not going to claim that there is no problem (and the biggest problem the country faces is inside the PMO), but the courts have been pretty damned good at blocking the Harper Regime's unconstitutional laws.

Everything from

Federal Court rightly strikes down Harper’s refugee health-care cuts

Supreme Court prostitution ruling forces issue on Harper

Supreme Court strikes down assisted suicide ban

Supreme Court softens Tories' tough-on-crime sentencing law

As for over-seers, we do need more and better ones, but let's not forget Sheila Fraser

and

Kevin Page who was actually appointed by Harper (and I imagine Harper regretted it):

His approach of questioning government estimates and issuing reports that are at odds with official government forecasts has created controversy. "There are former parliamentarians saying I should be held in contempt of Parliament and should be fired, but I’m okay with them saying that. That’s just part of the debate."[9] He has been unapologetic about his desire to give the Parliamentary Budget Office a significant role in informing Parliament and Canadians about government finances, saying "I went to the OECD, and they said the Americans have the best budget office, bar none. Why can't we be the best in five years? If that's overstepping my mandate, then I'm earning my money."[10]

Thus as we hear about judge after judge giving their blessings to insanely unconstitutional behaviour, and we hear about watchdogs that aren't watching keep in mind about who vetted these people in the first place.

I'm not going to claim that there is no problem (and the biggest problem the country faces is inside the PMO), but the courts have been pretty damned good at blocking the Harper Regime's unconstitutional laws.

Everything from

Federal Court rightly strikes down Harper’s refugee health-care cuts

Supreme Court prostitution ruling forces issue on Harper

Supreme Court strikes down assisted suicide ban

Supreme Court softens Tories' tough-on-crime sentencing law

As for over-seers, we do need more and better ones, but let's not forget Sheila Fraser

and

Kevin Page who was actually appointed by Harper (and I imagine Harper regretted it):

His approach of questioning government estimates and issuing reports that are at odds with official government forecasts has created controversy. "There are former parliamentarians saying I should be held in contempt of Parliament and should be fired, but I’m okay with them saying that. That’s just part of the debate."[9] He has been unapologetic about his desire to give the Parliamentary Budget Office a significant role in informing Parliament and Canadians about government finances, saying "I went to the OECD, and they said the Americans have the best budget office, bar none. Why can't we be the best in five years? If that's overstepping my mandate, then I'm earning my money."[10]

the harder we work to avoid it

you are already trackable, you know that right? this new EU law is only about formalizing / standardizing the process. you've already lost. do you really think that you could travel to a foreign country and back and be able to hide it?

Unless a person completely divorces themselves from civilization, they are trackable. And there really isn't much to be done about it.

And it can even be used to vindicate a person:

http://www.thestar.com/news/cr...

http://abc13.com/archive/94415...

http://www.keyetv.com/news/fea...

This one I thought particularly appropriate:

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/...

Since surveillance cameras are everywhere, if you are ever falsley accused, start handing out the subpoenas. In short, this guy was accused, arrested, and identified in a lineup as a "serial groper"

But after going through identifiable records from his office, email records, bank transactions, credit cards transaction, and vendors, as well as a more old fashioned alibi in one accusation, charges were dismissed, because it was proven that the perp was not him.

Which is not to say that I like being on camera, or being able to assemble my whereabouts all the time, all that much - but I damn well will use them to my advantage if need be.

The referenced UK survey showed that families with engineers in them can have between 2.5 to 8.6 *times* the statistical occurrence of autism in their children.

Just in case anyone reading your message jumps to the wrong conclusion, I'll remind everyone that correlation != causation, even in this case.

There is, however, growing evidence that microexons -- tiny gene fragments that aren't well understood -- that are linked to altered brain development in individuals with autism (paper).

And (IIRC) there is a certain amount of correlation between problems with microexons and older fathers. Due to the cost and length of their education, engineers may not be having children until they are older (and perhaps more established in their careers), increasing the risk factor (it has been well established that older fathers are more likely to sire autistic children).

I'm not accusing you of having much such an assumption. The correlation is interesting and needs further investigation, however it may just stems from age of fathers, rather than any special mental makeup of engineers.

Yaz

You tell me:

http://www.thestar.com/news/wo...

Can you provide links to the stories of these "skeptic scientists"

Canada does not now support science, or at least only a conservative politically correct version of it

http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read...

http://hour.ca/2006/04/20/catc...

http://ottawariverkeeper.ca/ne...

http://scienceblogs.com/confes...

http://www.thestar.com/opinion...

And in a happy flashback to the KGB monitoring it's people The Government actually sent people to MONITOR Canadian Scientists at an international polar conference!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technol...

http://ottawariverkeeper.ca/ne...

That is just about as creepy as it gets. A gulag for the evil scientists is next?

Any questions comrade?

2. depends on how competently the pipeline is operated. And the likely answer to that is "not very".

Transcanada does not exactly have a stellar record. Their Keystone phase 1 pipeline sprung 14 leaks in its first two years of operation. Across their network, they average better than 70 spills per year.

And their Bison natural gas pipeline blew the fuck up after just 6 months of operation.

I wouldn't trust these guys to operate a garden hose, much less a pipeline carrying dibit over a major aquifer.

I have come to understand that when courts refer to the "balance" between privacy and law enforcement or security, your privacy is about to get fucked in the ass.

In a report on a previous ruling,

The Supreme Court of Canada says police need a search warrant to get information from Internet service providers about their subscribers’ identities when they are under investigation.

Reportage of the decision here:
http://www.thestar.com/news/ca...

The real question to me is whether this means that a Canadian cop, once (s)he's arrested me, for some whatever infraction (running a burnt out light) could then force me to unlock my phone so (s)he can rife through it.

If so, the Canadian police state is more fully formed than in the US.

Didn't Blackberry give back door access to their phones to the governments of India, China and pretty much anyone else who asked?

Some simple fact checking would show this is false, yet it continues to persevere through the grossly uninformed.

Actually , it's true. India

The company has provided a solution that allows the government special access to Blackberry’s communication services, including BlackBerry Messenger and BlackBerry Internet Service email. As a result, the Indian government can now monitor the exchange of emails and email attachments on BlackBerry devices, as well as whether messages on Blackberry Messenger have been marked ‘delivered’ or ‘read.’

Saudi Arabia

Research in Motion has reportedly averted a ban on its BlackBerry communications services in Saudi Arabia in exchange for security concessions to the government.

Waterloo-based RIM has agreed to hand over user codes that would let Saudi authorities monitor its BlackBerry Messenger, a source close to the talks told Reuters News Agency on Tuesday.

The source said RIM would share with Saudi Arabia the unique pin number and code for each BlackBerry registered there. That will allow authorities to read encrypted text sent via Messenger, an instant messaging service that’s distinct from email sent on the BlackBerry that is so popular with its prized corporate and political customers.

Russia, China

On November, 2007, in order to sell its devices inside Russia, RIM provided its encryption keys to Mobile TeleSystems (MTS) which, in turn, provided access to the Federal Security Service (FSB). The official Russian law which mandates this supervision is Order 6 from 16.01.2008 "About the statement of Requirements for telecommunication networks for operational and search activities."

In January, 2008, RIM China announced that BlackBerry sales through China Mobile were on track although 2007 was the expected start date. The delay was due to the fact that "RIM needed to satisfy Beijing that its handsets posed no security threat to China’s communication networks, according to sector analysts." There’s only one way to satisfy the Chinese government regarding "security threats" and that’s to comply with Chinese law regarding supervision and monitoring.

You can find more if you look.

"But Toronto doesn't have a "strong mayor" like many American cities."

But it did have one just as corrupt as any american big city mayor...\

Not true.

For all of Rob Ford's many faults (incompetence, buffoonery, substance abuse, etc), corruption isn't one of them.

In fact, Rob Ford was sued for libel when he complained about a corrupt city deal for a 20-year contract that never went to public tender as required by law.

Rob Ford was ultimately victorious, and awarded legal costs:

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2012/12/27/rob_ford_libel_trial_judge_dismissed_6m_lawsuit_against_toronto_mayor.html
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/defamation-lawsuit-against-rob-ford-thrown-out-by-judge/article6752053/

And Rob Ford won on appeal:

http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/rob-ford-defamation-lawsuit-victory-upheld-by-appeal-court-1.1904082

Just last month PM Steven Harper refused to consider even an inquiry into the murder of more than a thousand indigenous Canadian women. http://www.thestar.com/opinion... Now somebody murders people closer to himself and suddenly he's ready to challenge the constitution? Tells you how much he values some women over his own skin.

He said the murder of Native women (8x that of non-native women in Canada) was "criminal" but not "sociological." He believes it should be dealt with as a police matter, without looking at larger causes and prevention – no changes necessary. But suddenly now we hear calls of "terrorists" and necessary measures because it appears some murders effect politicians more than others. Canada's indigenous women have been "terrorized" for a long time. I'd think if we reduce violence against the most vulnerable it will make us all safer, but maybe I'm being sociological?

That's not what the police said when it was being debated. I suspect they might have some authority on the subject of what is useful in criminal investigations.

Do you have any evidence to support your assertions?

> Google does not sell your private information. And yet the notion that they do is repeated ad infinitum.

You are absolutely correct.

> I wonder why.

Two reasons:
(1) Lots of people believe it because they don't fully understand Google's business
(2) Because it is short-hand for they could sell it in the future.

Google apologists will deny (2), but Google is a business. It is easy to for them to stick to their guns when it doesn't hurt them - just look at how much they used to support net neutrality and how much less vocal they are about it now. The point is that circumstances change. The day Google decides that selling access to the information it has collected would be more profitable is the day that their policies change and all your retroactively collected data now goes on sale.

In August 2009, a boy was hit by lightning and later died in hospital. Witnesses said the sky was blue above them, and there was no thunder or rain.

Link

http://www.thestar.com/news/ca...

While not our Prime Minister, he might be our next one...

I once saw a troll make a racist statement about Canadians. Yup, I wouldn't have thought it possible either, but troll managed it.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was another Canadian. Canadians might have a reputation for being nice, but I've seen enough racism, anti-ethnic slurs, LGBTphobia, and support for institutionalized bias from my fellow citizens to know better. Case in point - the Canadian government's dealing with the much much higher murder rate of aboriginal woman. Or rather, refusal - even after the UN added their voice to the demand for a public inquiry.

And let's not get started on the whole french-vs-english thing ...

Things are changing, but it's taking time.

Even if you do get the courts protection recall the "“antagonizing” the federal government and police if they shared too much information about authorities snooping their customers’ personal data" aspect.
"Telecom giants worried about ‘antagonizing’ feds on lawful access: documents" (May 21 2014)
http://www.thestar.com/news/ca...

Ironically, this incident was the result of nanny-state interference. The claim was that the boy's parents were abusive, but they don't say much about that other than some "allegations of shaking". So the state takes the kids away and sticks them with some truly evil monsters and apparently didn't do much of a job of checking up on them to see how it was all going.

Children's Aid Societies are NGOs who "receive funding from, and are under the supervision" of the government but their nannying is quite autonomous.

Also, they can operate without order or warrant.
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/ht...

Apprehension without warrant

(7) A child protection worker who believes on reasonable and probable grounds that,

(a) a child is in need of protection; and

(b) there would be a substantial risk to the childâ(TM)s health or safety during the time necessary to bring the matter on for a hearing under subsection 47 (1) or obtain a warrant under subsection (2),

may without a warrant bring the child to a place of safety. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.11, s. 40 (7).

All they need is to believe.

One might say that CAS are private organizations who are given a lot of liberty and leeway with their work and in their judgement.
With obviously little control or oversight.
Sounds a bit libertarian to me.

Particularly the part where they take the money from the government but refuse ceding any control to the government even while acknowledging their own faults and that they would not have happened HAD there been more control.
While happily accepting even more money "for training" from the government.
And refusing government investigation into their work on account of it being "expensive".

Todd Boyce is raising $25,000 for a statue of Jeffrey Baldwin.

I appreciate his caring about children, but wouldn't the time and money be better spent in other ways? Maybe working to write or enforce child-protection laws, or supporting shelters for neglected and abused children, or encouraging people to have children only if they want the children?

Symbolism is fine, but I think more direct support of children would do them more good. I think a statue would help other suffering children, only if the statue had a plaque or something that told the story of Jeffrey.

Kids starves to death -> build a monument where you feature him as superman.

There must be some crazy logic going on to come to that course of action.

I'm sure it would appear crazy to someone who didn't actually read the article. Third link in the summary above:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gt...

Which begins with the words: Before he died of starvation at the hands of his grandparents, Jeffrey Baldwin dreamed of being just like Superman.

Right under this photo of the kid in a Superman costume: http://www.thestar.com/content...

Kids starves to death -> build a monument where you feature him as superman.

There must be some crazy logic going on to come to that course of action.

I'm sure it would appear crazy to someone who didn't actually read the article. Third link in the summary above:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gt...

Which begins with the words: Before he died of starvation at the hands of his grandparents, Jeffrey Baldwin dreamed of being just like Superman.

Right under this photo of the kid in a Superman costume: http://www.thestar.com/content...

You live in Canada?

But you do all your shopping in the US to avoid those outrageous Canadian taxes.

Enjoy your next vacation in Mogadishu or Kandahar.

In one case, they'd required a permit for certain parking spots which I had, but a few days before I got my ticket they "revoked" permit parking in that area with no notification or indication.

Where do you live?

In some jurisdictions (such as where I live) the law is that the no parking rules must be clearly posted on signs. No signs = no valid ticket.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gt...

That being said, in this article's case, it's a fire hydrant. Everywhere I've lived you can't park in front of a fire hydrant. Apparently many New Yorkers don't know that and NYC needs to paint some lines on the ground to tell them.

On the other hand, I've seen some cities that have signs saying, "WAIT FOR THE GREEN LIGHT" at intersections, so NYC drivers aren't the only morons out there.

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/recr...

http://www.thestar.com/news/gt...

One Third isn't really most. It's bad enough you don't need to hyperbolize.