Uh, reading skills? It's right there on the page. It's directly drawn from participating police forces in the US, verified user data, and "Total Pay combines base annual salary or hourly wage, bonuses, profit sharing, tips, commissions, overtime pay and other forms of cash earnings, as applicable for this job. It does not include equity (stock) compensation, cash value of retirement benefits, or the value of other non-cash benefits (e.g. healthcare)."
Even your usnews doesn't actually have all the data, it's missing the first 10 years of wage data and starts at "patrol officer" aka someone with more then 8 years experience.
If they have an IQ of 25, you don't need to worry about sharing the road with them. They're going to have enough of a problem walking while drooling all over themselves.
Oh, I'm gonna bet it'll be good. Especially since a judge just slapped the Clinton handlers and State Dept., around again saying "no you'll release those emails now" after they tried pulling a "but we're so far behind, we'll release them after the election" BS.
And in all of this, the media continues to wonder why their trust rating by the public is under 10% now. Gee I wonder why, it couldn't have anything to do with you acting as an arm for a political campaign and it pissing people off whether they be democrat or republican. Nope...not a chance. It's those plebs that are out of touch, not those of us in our elitist towers presenting the news that those plebs need to know...in just the way they should.
Plus, cops get paid well, have great benefits and get to retire at 45, so excuse me if I don't break out my tiny violin. Oh yeah, and being a cop is a safer job than driving a beer truck, being a garbage man or a school janitor. We canonize cops way too much in this country.
Really? I guess it depends on where, because there's cops that only make $30k USD/year and have to buy everything from their uniforms and weapons to the fuel for their patrol cars. That still happens today. I knew cops back in the early 00's who made $18k/year(median wage $42k). Yep very well paying. Keep in mind that the median US wage is just under $50k these days. Never met a cop that retired at 45 who also didn't have 25 years of service in already either, they're also so rare that I can count the number of them on one hand. And again it depends on where you work doesn't it on "safe." If you're a long haul trucker you're pretty safe. If you pull stuff into the inner city shithole you're more likely to be shot, hijacked and so on. Same with police, if you're out in the country or patrolling the suburbs you're not at a high of a risk as compared to the guys working in the city. But you might have also missed that being a cop is still in the top 15 most dangerous jobs you can work at.
Also keep in mind that in the vast majority of those cases in those other 14 top jobs when someone dies? It's directly related to the job itself, usually mechanical failure, worksite related, and so on. Being a cop is one of the few jobs where direct interaction with the public is proportional to your chance of being killed.
I also like some of those "most dangerous" job listings. Lots of management in there, which isn't surprising. One of my first jobs was an apprentice at a auto garage. A first line manager(aka the person that deals with the people) was nearly crushed because he walked under a car which was being lowered.
First time they refused that as well, trying to claim he's an immigrant to the US(tip to people who go lulz he is!). He's a born citizen of the UK and maintains a permanent residence there. The second time, they refused to respond and he's sent a second letter stating that he'll take it up with the commissioners office if they refuse. Which could get interesting, since they can slap fines against twitter in the million range.
No, they state without proof that things happened. That's not showing the proof.
So you're now saying that those people linked didn't engage in harassment according to twitters own rules, or what you claimed was harassment by another individual(milo) for doing exactly the same thing? Might want to take those blinders off.
You've lost me. Chat logs of which incident are you referring to?
The ones you couldn't be bothered to read, or check in the linked stories. Maybe a fewmorewill help.
Or you're missing context, when someone is currently the target of a harassment campaign they're given a little more leeway than someone who tweets something out of the blue.
And even if there was a double standard (which I don't concede) your comment is still wrong, the alt-right would still be free to say whatever it wants, it would just be that only one side would be able to harass.
Apparently that was easy to disprove, as one can see what happens when you turn around and post exactly what someone else has said, but just happen to have the right connections inside twitter. Notice a similarity here? No? How about when facebook turned around and started removing groups for various imaginary thought-crimes. Starting to see a trend with social media now?
Again context, Jones was trying to retaliate and protect herself from a campaign initiated by Milo.
Context: She was doing it before Milo was involved. Read the story, click on the other links in the story.
I'm not familiar with all of those cases, certainly not the rape threats, and Twitter may have been inconsistent in the past. If so, they will hopefully fix that in the future. No one should be the target of harassment.
You mean like their "trust and safety council" which has done nothing? Or all of the past cases which they generally just sweep under the rug, unless it gets plenty of media attention.
But you're also conflating harassment with with social campaigns, like trying to excerpt pressure against shady businesses, or outing people who have done something bad (these campaigns are very troubling, but different from harassment).
For instance I don't think I'd mind as much if Milo had encouraged his followers to call the producer or studio to complain about the movie. The problem is that he was making Twitter into a place where a black actress couldn't really stay.
No, he wasn't doing anything of the sort. Then again, I suppose if you engage in the right kind of racism it's perfectly fine right? Just like it's okay with the right kind of sexism. See julie bindel, jessica valenti and so on, along with the lovely #killallmen stuff.
Hypothetically that could be true. But the credibility of the sources is so poor that it's hard to call them verifiable. If you want to show facts, you need some evidence they exist. Or you know random blog posts and archives of fake tweets. Either's good.
Well since those posts all show their proof of what happened, it sure does explain why you refuse to look at it and ignore facts when you're faced with them. Go on, I'll wait. Tell everyone how those people didn't actually sic their followers on people, and how those stories fabricated their own tweets which are linked. Go on and tell people how those chat logs are faked too, when the people named in there say that they're true. But apparently those are fake too right?
Can't dispute anything he's said, has to break down into insults. How a-typical. I remember playing with and against him in Quake, he was a jerk. But even at that, the shit that the US did was so far outside of what should have been allowed that anyone with a functioning brain should be on his side. Funny though, how he wants his extradition hearing televised and the US government is going nonononononono we can't let that happen. Sure does say a hell of a lot about the state of affairs doesn't it?
Ah I see, you're just going to make up stuff because while I'll accept actual facts...
Funny, there's actual facts in all those little links I posted. Strange that you don't find them to be the "right kind of facts" for you though. Which of course says a hell of a lot about what you'd believe, that being the only facts that fits your ideology and agenda are the type you'd accept.
It'd kinda like that stuff with Gamergate. You'll wholly believe the wikipedia article is accurate, but when proven how each section you quoted is factually inaccurate you ignore it, try to move the goal posts, or simply run away. When shown that the people who claimed "gamergate is harassing them" are shown to be the actual harassers, you ignore it or run away. Perhaps you should just save everyone the trouble and move to a country that still has an operating politburo.
Tell you what. You dispute those facts, which have pretty little pictures, and links(either directly or archived links) which prove what's in the articles to start with.
But anyone who's looked at the articles can already tell what'll happen. They disprove your point, you can't offer any proof contrary to what's being said. And you refuse to look at a countering point of view because it would hurt the narrative you've been holding onto for the last two years. That social justice and many of them that claim they're "part of that movement" are just plain terrible people who are only in it to make themselves feel good. And in the very worst cases, they do everything that they accuse those they're attacking of doing.
No he didn't fake a tweet. Rather he tweeted something he believed to be true from another twitter user who had faked it. That guardian article, like usual is full of factual inaccuracies.
There's a fundamental difference between the two, but I'm glad that you like always ignore the rest. After all, can't let that narrative you've clung onto for two years be disproven in your mind. And those people you've been defending really were and are just plain shitty people who were unworthy of your white-knighting and were engaging in the exact thing that they claimed gamergate did. Never mind 2 years on, that there continues to be no proof of anyone in gamergate having done anything. But it continues to come out that the "non-existent anti-ggers" as you've put it in the past, really were out there doing it. Fun reminder: In that heatst article, Ian is one of the people in those logs and had a change of heart after realizing he had become that which he claimed he was fighting against.
Dude, you never did reply to my other post a few weeks ago that disproved all your other bullshit. Then again, kathleen cross(Quinnae) is in those logs...you know, Sarkeesian's right-hand at the time. But it's always so good when you trot out the "I don't like the facts, they show the side I have a vested interest in doing bad shit!"
No one is stopping you from spewing whatever inane stupidy passes for incitement commentary among your crowd. You'll be just as free to make an idiot of yourself on Twitter once these changes are in effect.
Keep in mind that Milo never did that, but Leslie Jones sure did. So have several other people who were verified including a rapper,reporter, and a EiC of a magazine...all of whom sic'd their followers on other people for engaging in wrong think. There's also another case of a person threatening a reporter with rape...for weeks(wish I could remember her name but it escapes me atm). Those are just off the top of my head. You know what the difference between them and Milo is? Milo doesn't carry the same political ideology as them. That reporter? She's a conservative. But in both cases when there are actual threats against them? Twitter has done nothing.
Disagree all you want, but when you cross into harassment then GTFO. No one is under any obligation to stand there while you abuse them.
Sure thing. Let me know when they actually start going after the actual harassers okay? You know people like Zoe Quinn, Kathleen Cross, Randy Harper, Izzy Galvez, Chris Kluwe and so on. You know, the people who claim that they're against harassment...right out there...harassing people, doxing people, and so on.
I'd moderate you down for posting something so stupid, but what the hell...I'll reply in stead. Conservatives already know that despite the myths that they don't. Religious conservatives on the other hand? That ranges from yes they agree that it does, to nope not at all, to varying religious reasons that they're against it.
But while we're trotting out the bullshit, how about we toss this one in the ring. It would be nice if liberals would admit that GMO crops could help the world, or Margaret Sanger was a devout racist who believed that birth control was the perfect way to fix the "negro problem." I'm sure someone will come out with but but but, yeah. Go read up on the "negro project" and then look at the history and background of both people. There wasn't an altruistic motive, they believe that negros were subhuman and the best way to fix it was to stop them from reproducing. Enjoy that eugenics ideology there guys.
No I actually have an idea of what they're for....having lived in the area as a kid. They just happen to have used it for several decades before they shut it down, don't make assumptions. They have a tendency of not turning out like you'd think. FYI the MTO station was 2.2km further then that one, and is still in operation. The one used for official measurements is now 40km away.
Did they place it next to the 401, or did they place the 401 next to the weather station?
Next to the 401 of course. The 401 was built in the 1950's and 60's. The weather station was installed in the 90's to provide meteorological data for Environment Canada(also known as EC). Despite what the person replying to you said, this was the official monitoring station for a city. It was removed in 2009, and the meteorological data is now reported from a city around 40KM away as the officially reported data, that also includes temperature, wind, rainfall and so on. It's not a MTO station, that one is still 2.2km further then that station.
So yeah, figure that one out. Official and recorded meteorological data for a region is from 40km away, and is considered to be correct. Well I suppose that's okay, it's not as bad that one in Alberta records data that's then used in climate models for all towns and cities within 300km.
You mean the weather stations which are part of the Ontario road weather network, installed specifically to get weather information along Ontario roads?
You mean it was at one time the official environment canada weather station until it was shutdown and then removed for an entire city. Now that cities "official" meteorological reports come from London.
A provincial forestry weather station. Odds are it's in that specific spot because of either accessibility, power, or it's a known problem spot.
Nope, sorry it's an official EC weather station. Yep I know, it's hard to believe isn't it. Welcome to Canada.
Let's be realistic, there's lot of places especially here in Canada where there are no more weather monitoring stations. Then there are also lots of weather stations in bad places, seen plenty of those out in Alberta and in Ontario. My personal favorites? The one that was placed next to the 401(one of the busiest highway systems in the world), nothing like a pile of vehicle exhaust and hot asphalt to give accurate temperatures. The other, was out in Alberta which was in a valley, next to a river fed from mountain water run-off(roughly 4m away), which spent 2/3's of the day in the shade of a pine tree forest. Then there's all the weather stations that have only existed since 1980 or 1973ish when we had that series of really harsh winters and glaciers were growing at an incredibly fast rate.
I completed highschool roughly 10 years previous to that in the middle of the 90's. My group was the last to have welding, drafting/cad, carpentry and electronics, or even basic electrical work. We were also the last group to do machining, pipe fitting, or automotive. Every program relating to that was cut, gutted, and removed. Right up until this upcoming year those programs haven't existed, they were all replaced with arts, or just really anything else that they could think of that was no use. Even the 4H sponsored programs were removed. I lived in a very heavy farming area around 90% of the kids were all farm students, there were 4 highschools(now 3 where I used to live), multiple grade schools(around 7 then, 4 now). Roughly the same middle schools. Class sizes went up, number of schools went down. And number of classes disappeared too. The middle schools here don't have anything in their music classes that we did. When we were in grade 6, we were playing on the "big band" instruments, now? Nothing higher then a recorder until grade 9.
Most of my friends though, went directly into the jobs they wanted as well. Several of them are mechanics to this day, own their own shops(some of them several), two own specialized shops that deal with only modern electronics in cars. All the dealerships contract through them to deal with any electronics issues. But it was a different time, people who were smart went into manufacturing and expanded their skills there. These days, the kids graduating from highschool have learned less then those of us from 20 years ago and were taught that those trade skills were unimportant because they'd all be working white collar jobs.
I'm also a Canadian, living in Canada. I'll bet that you learned that outside of Ontario too. Since around 2001ish the provincial government implemented a "all schools will teach exactly the same thing" programs. Even in '97 when my sister graduated, those programs were gone and they were moving towards the "all schools teach the same stuff"
Every other complaint is just a variation on "I shouldn't have to be price competitive because I was born in America".
You meant to say: "I'm fine with a company importing in people where there is a demand for jobs that Americans could do, then displacing me from my job with someone from another country, making me train my replacement who will work for 1/4 of the wages I worked for."
Yep brilliant. Millions of people out of work in the US and not in the labor force, and you're pro "let's bring in more people, and make sure they drive the wages down" while there are people who could do the job, but the companies don't want to hire because they can find someone from a 3rd world shithole at a cheaper price and can legally import them.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, reading skills? It's right there on the page. It's directly drawn from participating police forces in the US, verified user data, and "Total Pay combines base annual salary or hourly wage, bonuses, profit sharing, tips, commissions, overtime pay and other forms of cash earnings, as applicable for this job. It does not include equity (stock) compensation, cash value of retirement benefits, or the value of other non-cash benefits (e.g. healthcare)."
Even your usnews doesn't actually have all the data, it's missing the first 10 years of wage data and starts at "patrol officer" aka someone with more then 8 years experience.
If they have an IQ of 25, you don't need to worry about sharing the road with them. They're going to have enough of a problem walking while drooling all over themselves.
The average police salary in the US is $56,810. They can retire after 20 years at 50% of their salary
Better look up your numbers again, reality is sometimes different.
Oh, I'm gonna bet it'll be good. Especially since a judge just slapped the Clinton handlers and State Dept., around again saying "no you'll release those emails now" after they tried pulling a "but we're so far behind, we'll release them after the election" BS.
And in all of this, the media continues to wonder why their trust rating by the public is under 10% now. Gee I wonder why, it couldn't have anything to do with you acting as an arm for a political campaign and it pissing people off whether they be democrat or republican. Nope...not a chance. It's those plebs that are out of touch, not those of us in our elitist towers presenting the news that those plebs need to know...in just the way they should.
Plus, cops get paid well, have great benefits and get to retire at 45, so excuse me if I don't break out my tiny violin. Oh yeah, and being a cop is a safer job than driving a beer truck, being a garbage man or a school janitor. We canonize cops way too much in this country.
Really? I guess it depends on where, because there's cops that only make $30k USD/year and have to buy everything from their uniforms and weapons to the fuel for their patrol cars. That still happens today. I knew cops back in the early 00's who made $18k/year(median wage $42k). Yep very well paying. Keep in mind that the median US wage is just under $50k these days. Never met a cop that retired at 45 who also didn't have 25 years of service in already either, they're also so rare that I can count the number of them on one hand. And again it depends on where you work doesn't it on "safe." If you're a long haul trucker you're pretty safe. If you pull stuff into the inner city shithole you're more likely to be shot, hijacked and so on. Same with police, if you're out in the country or patrolling the suburbs you're not at a high of a risk as compared to the guys working in the city. But you might have also missed that being a cop is still in the top 15 most dangerous jobs you can work at.
Also keep in mind that in the vast majority of those cases in those other 14 top jobs when someone dies? It's directly related to the job itself, usually mechanical failure, worksite related, and so on. Being a cop is one of the few jobs where direct interaction with the public is proportional to your chance of being killed.
I also like some of those "most dangerous" job listings. Lots of management in there, which isn't surprising. One of my first jobs was an apprentice at a auto garage. A first line manager(aka the person that deals with the people) was nearly crushed because he walked under a car which was being lowered.
First time they refused that as well, trying to claim he's an immigrant to the US(tip to people who go lulz he is!). He's a born citizen of the UK and maintains a permanent residence there. The second time, they refused to respond and he's sent a second letter stating that he'll take it up with the commissioners office if they refuse. Which could get interesting, since they can slap fines against twitter in the million range.
No, they state without proof that things happened. That's not showing the proof.
So you're now saying that those people linked didn't engage in harassment according to twitters own rules, or what you claimed was harassment by another individual(milo) for doing exactly the same thing? Might want to take those blinders off.
You've lost me. Chat logs of which incident are you referring to?
The ones you couldn't be bothered to read, or check in the linked stories. Maybe a few more will help.
Or you're missing context, when someone is currently the target of a harassment campaign they're given a little more leeway than someone who tweets something out of the blue.
And even if there was a double standard (which I don't concede) your comment is still wrong, the alt-right would still be free to say whatever it wants, it would just be that only one side would be able to harass.
Apparently that was easy to disprove, as one can see what happens when you turn around and post exactly what someone else has said, but just happen to have the right connections inside twitter. Notice a similarity here? No? How about when facebook turned around and started removing groups for various imaginary thought-crimes. Starting to see a trend with social media now?
Again context, Jones was trying to retaliate and protect herself from a campaign initiated by Milo.
Context: She was doing it before Milo was involved. Read the story, click on the other links in the story.
I'm not familiar with all of those cases, certainly not the rape threats, and Twitter may have been inconsistent in the past. If so, they will hopefully fix that in the future. No one should be the target of harassment.
You mean like their "trust and safety council" which has done nothing? Or all of the past cases which they generally just sweep under the rug, unless it gets plenty of media attention.
But you're also conflating harassment with with social campaigns, like trying to excerpt pressure against shady businesses, or outing people who have done something bad (these campaigns are very troubling, but different from harassment).
For instance I don't think I'd mind as much if Milo had encouraged his followers to call the producer or studio to complain about the movie. The problem is that he was making Twitter into a place where a black actress couldn't really stay.
No, he wasn't doing anything of the sort. Then again, I suppose if you engage in the right kind of racism it's perfectly fine right? Just like it's okay with the right kind of sexism. See julie bindel, jessica valenti and so on, along with the lovely #killallmen stuff.
Hypothetically that could be true. But the credibility of the sources is so poor that it's hard to call them verifiable. If you want to show facts, you need some evidence they exist. Or you know random blog posts and archives of fake tweets. Either's good.
Well since those posts all show their proof of what happened, it sure does explain why you refuse to look at it and ignore facts when you're faced with them. Go on, I'll wait. Tell everyone how those people didn't actually sic their followers on people, and how those stories fabricated their own tweets which are linked. Go on and tell people how those chat logs are faked too, when the people named in there say that they're true. But apparently those are fake too right?
Can't dispute anything he's said, has to break down into insults. How a-typical. I remember playing with and against him in Quake, he was a jerk. But even at that, the shit that the US did was so far outside of what should have been allowed that anyone with a functioning brain should be on his side. Funny though, how he wants his extradition hearing televised and the US government is going nonononononono we can't let that happen. Sure does say a hell of a lot about the state of affairs doesn't it?
Ah I see, you're just going to make up stuff because while I'll accept actual facts ...
Funny, there's actual facts in all those little links I posted. Strange that you don't find them to be the "right kind of facts" for you though. Which of course says a hell of a lot about what you'd believe, that being the only facts that fits your ideology and agenda are the type you'd accept.
It'd kinda like that stuff with Gamergate. You'll wholly believe the wikipedia article is accurate, but when proven how each section you quoted is factually inaccurate you ignore it, try to move the goal posts, or simply run away. When shown that the people who claimed "gamergate is harassing them" are shown to be the actual harassers, you ignore it or run away. Perhaps you should just save everyone the trouble and move to a country that still has an operating politburo.
Tell you what. You dispute those facts, which have pretty little pictures, and links(either directly or archived links) which prove what's in the articles to start with.
But anyone who's looked at the articles can already tell what'll happen. They disprove your point, you can't offer any proof contrary to what's being said. And you refuse to look at a countering point of view because it would hurt the narrative you've been holding onto for the last two years. That social justice and many of them that claim they're "part of that movement" are just plain terrible people who are only in it to make themselves feel good. And in the very worst cases, they do everything that they accuse those they're attacking of doing.
No he didn't fake a tweet. Rather he tweeted something he believed to be true from another twitter user who had faked it. That guardian article, like usual is full of factual inaccuracies.
There's a fundamental difference between the two, but I'm glad that you like always ignore the rest. After all, can't let that narrative you've clung onto for two years be disproven in your mind. And those people you've been defending really were and are just plain shitty people who were unworthy of your white-knighting and were engaging in the exact thing that they claimed gamergate did. Never mind 2 years on, that there continues to be no proof of anyone in gamergate having done anything. But it continues to come out that the "non-existent anti-ggers" as you've put it in the past, really were out there doing it. Fun reminder: In that heatst article, Ian is one of the people in those logs and had a change of heart after realizing he had become that which he claimed he was fighting against.
Dude, you never did reply to my other post a few weeks ago that disproved all your other bullshit. Then again, kathleen cross(Quinnae) is in those logs...you know, Sarkeesian's right-hand at the time. But it's always so good when you trot out the "I don't like the facts, they show the side I have a vested interest in doing bad shit!"
No one is stopping you from spewing whatever inane stupidy passes for incitement commentary among your crowd. You'll be just as free to make an idiot of yourself on Twitter once these changes are in effect.
Really? You should pay more attention, because that's exactly what's happening. This is just one case of many, where there is one set of rules for one group of people and another for the "right kind of people."
Keep in mind that Milo never did that, but Leslie Jones sure did. So have several other people who were verified including a rapper, reporter, and a EiC of a magazine ...all of whom sic'd their followers on other people for engaging in wrong think. There's also another case of a person threatening a reporter with rape...for weeks(wish I could remember her name but it escapes me atm). Those are just off the top of my head. You know what the difference between them and Milo is? Milo doesn't carry the same political ideology as them. That reporter? She's a conservative. But in both cases when there are actual threats against them? Twitter has done nothing.
Disagree all you want, but when you cross into harassment then GTFO. No one is under any obligation to stand there while you abuse them.
Sure thing. Let me know when they actually start going after the actual harassers okay? You know people like Zoe Quinn, Kathleen Cross, Randy Harper, Izzy Galvez, Chris Kluwe and so on. You know, the people who claim that they're against harassment...right out there...harassing people, doxing people, and so on.
I'd moderate you down for posting something so stupid, but what the hell...I'll reply in stead. Conservatives already know that despite the myths that they don't. Religious conservatives on the other hand? That ranges from yes they agree that it does, to nope not at all, to varying religious reasons that they're against it.
But while we're trotting out the bullshit, how about we toss this one in the ring. It would be nice if liberals would admit that GMO crops could help the world, or Margaret Sanger was a devout racist who believed that birth control was the perfect way to fix the "negro problem." I'm sure someone will come out with but but but, yeah. Go read up on the "negro project" and then look at the history and background of both people. There wasn't an altruistic motive, they believe that negros were subhuman and the best way to fix it was to stop them from reproducing. Enjoy that eugenics ideology there guys.
No I actually have an idea of what they're for....having lived in the area as a kid. They just happen to have used it for several decades before they shut it down, don't make assumptions. They have a tendency of not turning out like you'd think. FYI the MTO station was 2.2km further then that one, and is still in operation. The one used for official measurements is now 40km away.
Did they place it next to the 401, or did they place the 401 next to the weather station?
Next to the 401 of course. The 401 was built in the 1950's and 60's. The weather station was installed in the 90's to provide meteorological data for Environment Canada(also known as EC). Despite what the person replying to you said, this was the official monitoring station for a city. It was removed in 2009, and the meteorological data is now reported from a city around 40KM away as the officially reported data, that also includes temperature, wind, rainfall and so on. It's not a MTO station, that one is still 2.2km further then that station.
So yeah, figure that one out. Official and recorded meteorological data for a region is from 40km away, and is considered to be correct. Well I suppose that's okay, it's not as bad that one in Alberta records data that's then used in climate models for all towns and cities within 300km.
You mean the weather stations which are part of the Ontario road weather network, installed specifically to get weather information along Ontario roads?
You mean it was at one time the official environment canada weather station until it was shutdown and then removed for an entire city. Now that cities "official" meteorological reports come from London.
A provincial forestry weather station. Odds are it's in that specific spot because of either accessibility, power, or it's a known problem spot.
Nope, sorry it's an official EC weather station. Yep I know, it's hard to believe isn't it. Welcome to Canada.
Let's be realistic, there's lot of places especially here in Canada where there are no more weather monitoring stations. Then there are also lots of weather stations in bad places, seen plenty of those out in Alberta and in Ontario. My personal favorites? The one that was placed next to the 401(one of the busiest highway systems in the world), nothing like a pile of vehicle exhaust and hot asphalt to give accurate temperatures. The other, was out in Alberta which was in a valley, next to a river fed from mountain water run-off(roughly 4m away), which spent 2/3's of the day in the shade of a pine tree forest. Then there's all the weather stations that have only existed since 1980 or 1973ish when we had that series of really harsh winters and glaciers were growing at an incredibly fast rate.
I envy you, especially the premier you guys have out there. Wynne(and McGuinty) has been nothing but a disaster for anyone outside of the GTA.
I thought NAMBLA would like a Boybang, aren't men a bit out of their age range? Or are they going for "best double team evar!"
I've been frustrated with Chrome's greed lately and would love an alternative.
Palemoon, Vivaldi, Brave, Waterfox, Maxthon
I completed highschool roughly 10 years previous to that in the middle of the 90's. My group was the last to have welding, drafting/cad, carpentry and electronics, or even basic electrical work. We were also the last group to do machining, pipe fitting, or automotive. Every program relating to that was cut, gutted, and removed. Right up until this upcoming year those programs haven't existed, they were all replaced with arts, or just really anything else that they could think of that was no use. Even the 4H sponsored programs were removed. I lived in a very heavy farming area around 90% of the kids were all farm students, there were 4 highschools(now 3 where I used to live), multiple grade schools(around 7 then, 4 now). Roughly the same middle schools. Class sizes went up, number of schools went down. And number of classes disappeared too. The middle schools here don't have anything in their music classes that we did. When we were in grade 6, we were playing on the "big band" instruments, now? Nothing higher then a recorder until grade 9.
Most of my friends though, went directly into the jobs they wanted as well. Several of them are mechanics to this day, own their own shops(some of them several), two own specialized shops that deal with only modern electronics in cars. All the dealerships contract through them to deal with any electronics issues. But it was a different time, people who were smart went into manufacturing and expanded their skills there. These days, the kids graduating from highschool have learned less then those of us from 20 years ago and were taught that those trade skills were unimportant because they'd all be working white collar jobs.
I'm also a Canadian, living in Canada. I'll bet that you learned that outside of Ontario too. Since around 2001ish the provincial government implemented a "all schools will teach exactly the same thing" programs. Even in '97 when my sister graduated, those programs were gone and they were moving towards the "all schools teach the same stuff"
Every other complaint is just a variation on "I shouldn't have to be price competitive because I was born in America".
You meant to say: "I'm fine with a company importing in people where there is a demand for jobs that Americans could do, then displacing me from my job with someone from another country, making me train my replacement who will work for 1/4 of the wages I worked for."
Yep brilliant. Millions of people out of work in the US and not in the labor force, and you're pro "let's bring in more people, and make sure they drive the wages down" while there are people who could do the job, but the companies don't want to hire because they can find someone from a 3rd world shithole at a cheaper price and can legally import them.