So why don't you tell everyone why a bureaucrat in Washington DC., should be the one to decide where a new hospital is built. I'm not sure what's worse, that Canadian provinces have more control over healthcare decisions then US states, or you bringing up "ye olde Somalia" bullshit because that's the very definition of spewing ignorant talking points like a parrot.
Since when are you the person who defines what being a Republican means? Maybe it's you guys on the extreme right who are RINOs as most are far more moderate then you.
"Extreme right" aka constitutionalist that believes it's not a "living breathing document", holds "pro-gun" views, doesn't like censorship, and believes that "smaller government" and "state rights" should be the primary drivers.
Why would they write a new bill from the ground up and start fresh building support for it?
Ask yourself the question: "Why do I want to support a bill which has the backing of organizations that are actively censoring."
Also, do you not see the irony of complaining about people screeching "nazi" and the immediately, in the very same sentence, screeching "nazi" yourself?
No, because I'm using the left's definition of "nazi." If the left wants to screech that Richard Spencer is a nazi for being an ethnonationalist, and the democrats vote in a person who's an ethonationalist. They are by their own definition a nazi.
Only if you have a ridiculously far right notion of what it means to be a republican (which you clearly do). RINO is a pathetic attempt to apply a purity test to a member of the party. By today's standards Reagan would be called a RINO. Heaven forbid someone attempt to have a fruitful negotiation with someone they don't agree with complete. Or *gasp* actually compromise about anything.
That makes absolutely no sense, I like how you tossed in "far-right". Especially since Reagan is far more conservative then the current party. If Regan ran today, the left would be screeching that he's Hitler reborn from the ashes.(never mind that many of the talking points from the 1980's are the same as today) A RINO by definition is a person who's "riding on the party name and voting on the opposite side of the isle." McCain is the classic example of someone who preaches that they're a conservative and votes ideologically opposite of it. That's not a purity test in the least. That's the classic of "bad faith politics."
You know what "far-left" looks like? When you have members of the DNC saying "my job is to shut white people up" or when members and party leaders hold pro-segregation views. You know, "this space is only for PoC" for example.
Those people named? They're not moderates or conservatives. They're RINO's, much like how many of the democrats today are DINO's or if you prefer, batshit insane crazy progressives in both cases or people out to enrich themselves at the taxpayer expense. What should really bother people is that democrats want to push back the old system that was broken in the first place, chalk full of regulations and *not* NN. Instead of say writing a bill from the ground up that's simple and clear. If the democrats could do that, without attaching 240 riders to, you could even get Rand Paul to join in on it. And Rand Paul is far closer to an actual Liberal(not the modern corrupted version) then any democrat sitting today and has a lot of pull with multiple groups on the right.
And since this is going to dive headlong into politics, maybe democrats would like to explain two things: First why did your party decide to embrace the neo-cons with open arms when tea party groups drove them out and told them to piss off. What you didn't notice the suddenly pro-war, we need more war, more war is always good people? Have you been paying attention? You know those guys, people like David "The Republican Party is dead!" Frum or in simple terms, they threw my ass out because all I wanted was war to enrich my friends. Second, why did democrats decide to go "more of the same" by following Clintons path? While at the same time not squashing the people who've been screeching *insert people are nazis* when the current deputy chair has openly advocated for a black ethnostate(aka he's an actual nazi).
Nuclear isn't built on the idea that it requires storage. Nuclear is built on the idea that it carries total base load, or near base load. Most nuclear power plants are based around the idea that they'll carry between 70-85% of all grid demands at all times. It's the "fast spinup" plants that cover peak, over-demand and so on. That's coal, hydroelectric, natural gas. Wind/solar? Wind has to blow meaning if it's not, it has to rely on storage to balance load. Solar the sun has to shine, doesn't work out very well in a lot of places where you see 2/3's of the year with cloud cover or the panels are covered in snow and again requires batteries to carry that load.
Uh not even close. The bid prices in the US for solar are around 0.188kWh around 0.30kWh for solar. Coal however does come in at around 0.032kWh however. If you use batteries for load balancing? Double that. Triple it if it's a combined solar/wind battery balancing system. Those prices are still half of what we pay in Canada. It still is cheaper to build a coal power plant, it is still cheaper to flood thousands of KM of land and build a dam. Kinda like what they're doing out in BC, where there are no lack of passes for wind. And it's *still* cheaper to build a brand new hydroelectric dam.
Ask yourself why the political left spent the last ~17 years screeching that anyone who doesn't believe the same stuff as them are "racists, sexists, homophobic, islamophobic" and have now moved onto labeling anyone who doesn't believe what they do, are "nazis"
Plain old mechanical mercury switch is good for around 70-90 years after the initial test, and require no secondary yearly testing as long as the mercury hasn't leaked. And that it can along with the wiring be checked with a spot inspection. They're still used in a lot of stuff, that require one-off emergency trip fails. One of the heavy industry companies I worked for exclusively used them as part of the auto-stop system in the event of an emergency. Because they always work, sure mercury is toxic, it hurts the environment. But when you want a 99.99999% of there being zero failure? Sometimes old tech is still best tech.
You think that's good? Just wait until the car can make the decision whether or not you're a higher or lower priority in the event of a crash, and whether or not while "talking" with the other vehicles about to crash that they decide to collectively kill you because someone else has a better chance of surviving.
Well, I answered that in a separate (and relatively short) thread, which I also re-read. Nope. No suggestions as to what I might do to help the cause. They're not there, because you never made them. So, how about dropping few now?
You mean where I pointed out that there's a lack of DV shelters? That the legal system holds lopsided views? Where HR dept's, act in a manner against one particular party? Those are all suggestions to where you can "help the cause." I don't know where you live, and in turn left it vague. You have to get off your ass and look up things locally because in the real world, people don't hold your hand. This is something you should have already figured out if you are, what you actually say.
Further, whataboutism is a term used to compat the handwaving of others. Do you not see how "they do it, too" is a handwaving maneuver? It is, it's designed to deflect responsibility by saying it should be okay for you to do something because someone else also does that thing; the intent of pointing out when that happens (e.g. calling out whataboutism) is to open up the conversation and basically say "okay, yes, let's discuss that and what you're doing, then"; that's basically the opposite of handwaving. You, however, seem to not want to discuss things openly, preferring to hide behind purposefully misleading questions and non-answers.
And you seem to be doing a really good job of handwaving, not only that but you've also managed to not read anything. And in your absolute haste twice in a row, you've managed to miss things that are plain. Maybe go back and read a third time, and you'll figure it out? Or maybe you're just happier when you're tucking tail instead of dealing with a two-fold problem. Both the witch-hunt mentality, and the absolute lack and obvious need to deal with women who also fall into that same category.
Wave away, my friend. Oh, and don't bother emailing me; you don't deserve to know what I've been through.
Victimhood as a currency is on the way out, you might want to try cashing in now.
You should be asking yourself that question. Are you so upset at the idea of voter-id that you have to throw a hissyfit?
Yeah, a simple search of the fake news. In the REAL world when they investigated the claims of vote fraud, the most partisan investigators the GOP could find just couldn't find the evidence. It's fundamentally impossible to conceal a conspiracy involving lots of people.
You don't need a conspiracy involving "lots of people" you only need individual actors who are swayed by a "community leader" to make something happen. Funny how there's plenty of cases that have ended up in the courts, of course the courts are just fake news too right?
Election fraud is quite different. Let's take partisan gerrymandering as an example. The essential trick involves 2 principles: #1: Draw lines so your districts are safe. #2: Waste your opponent's votes are concentrated into the smallest number of sacrificial districts.
Yeah and both parties should be blasted to shit for it. But both parties do it, and some of the worst examples however just happen to be in the richest democrat held cities too. Though there are a few republican, and surprise when those republicans gain power they immediately flip it. Maybe you could get off your ass instead of whining, and do something proactive about it right? Or would that be too much work?
You've gotta go back decades before you find even half-way plausible stories to that effect.
And yet a simple search and you can find hundreds of stories from the 2016 and 2012 elections where people voted illegally sometimes dozens of times. You can even find cases of pollworkers fraudulently interfering in elections. The real question is, if those are the people getting caught because they're sloppy, how many don't get caught?
As a point, Canada requires voter ID. Requires a few pieces no less to prove that you're voting in the right area too. Even then we have cases of voter fraud. So you tell me, in a country like the US where democrats and progressives fight tooth and nail against any type of ID - something that every other western nation requires, how many cases aren't being caught?
The same way as in Canada, the CRTC(same as FCC) is an independent body(crown corp) from the government but also run by the government. The CRTC is answerable to parliament, PM and minister of industry. They're independent because the existing laws require that the organizations have to "overstep" massively to be accountable to the governing body. The people who are actually in charge are the hired bureaucrats, the people who keep watch are the ones appointed by the PMO's office or parliament to make sure those bureaucrats aren't stepping over the line either.
Here's an example: In Canada, internet is regulated by the CRTC and "classified" as such. Back oh 7-8 years ago, the current head of the CRTC at the behest of Bell, Rogers, and Telus tried to reclassify "last mile" for TPIA's(third party companies that lease the last mile from them), and up the amount that those TPIA's would have to pay. It would make a 25/1Mbps plan go from $49 to $90-120/mo. The TPIA industry is larger then what most people think in Canada, and it's profitable more or less even when 60% of that $49 goes directly to the last mile operator for the lease. This was a case of the CRTC overstepping it's bounds and breaking one of the foundational rules that they exist to *serve* the public and protect consumers from industry overstep. It basically came down to a staring contest between the CRTC and Parliament. With the PMO's office openly stating that if the CRTC did increase those rates, they'd introduce new laws and regulations stripping the CRTC of regulatory power. The CRTC blinked first, rules remain unchanged, etc, etc.
No need, we've been on the same page there this whole time. You're just too blinded by ignorant rage to see it.
There's some more assumptions, maybe you need to stop projecting.
I didn't say there was fuck all I could do about it, I said there was fuck all I could do about it other than what I'm already doing . That said... There are things I could be doing, such as? This is a chance to further your cause rather than just slinging thinly-veiled insults.
I mentioned those already, why don't you go re-read my other posts. Then again I'm following your lead. Remember? You were the one that started slinging those thinly veiled insults.
Yet you believe your views matter. How quaint.
How ignorant and arrogant does someone have to be to dismiss another persons views without actually answering them? Maybe you should oh what's that phrase you used? Ah right, "go look in the mirror."
You're right. None of this is anything particularly new, it's been going on for at least as long as I've been alive, yet we've gotten on just fine for decades. In fact, if we expand the scope beyond the current witch hunt, we've had one or another going on for the entirety of human history. You can lose sleep over it all you want, but it's really just business as usual.
Oh look, shall we apply your favorite word? "whataboutism" gee, why oh why can't you stay on topic. For someone who doesn't have a vested interest in actually making sure that things are impartial, you sure are arguing pretty hard for the status-quo, or going by your own words in several posts that the current "listen and believe" isn't a problem.
Basically if you're asian or white, you need to do twice to four times better then anyone else to land a position. Seriously, there's real racism going on here. But it's sure not in whites or asians favor.
I'm trying to remember the actual case, but I'm pretty sure it ran down like this. Person from India or Pakistan, came to Canada with a mechanical engineering degree. The requirements in Canada require that if you get a degree out-of-country you have to submit to reexamination. Went all the way to court, and the court said nope, you're just doing that because of his race. The examination rules were rewritten to get around that particular court case and still require reexamination.
If there's one thing you can be sure of, it's that in today's hypersensitivity of "you're only doing this because x, reason so I don't have to follow your rules!" bullshit, you can be sure that there's a judge somewhere that will agree with that "progressive agenda" and put people at risk.
The cheapest place to buy gasoline in all of Canada is in the province of Alberta, where it is currently sitting at about $1cdn per liter, which works out to $3.50 usd/gallon. Where I live, the price is over $5 usd/gallon.
So you're in a remote location but that's a problem? But let's also convert the price, it's actually $2.99/USD/gallon for fuel in Alberta(Pop 4m), that's because you forgot the conversion. In Ontario(pop 14.7m) however, you can easily hit $5/USD/gallon. Bread is also $8/loaf, and it's $40 for 24 cans of coke or pepsi in that location. Most prices for fuel in the US is around 2.25/USD/gal to $2.80/gal. Which works out to being $2.84/CAD/gal to $3.51CAD/gallon.
Right now, gas is running about $1.20/l or $4.50/gal Canadian. Or $3.59Gal USD in most of Ontario.
Whataboutism, again; and incorrect whataboutism, at that. I simply sensed projection and called it out.
Why not actually address something instead? Right, that's too difficult. Maybe less buzzwords made up by media personalities for hand-waving, and more critical thinking.
Perhaps I figured, if that were the case, it would have come up by now. At this point you've still only insinuated it, so I'll continue on believing that to not be the case.
Assumption based on nothing. Time for you to go read up some case law perhaps? Read some news papers outside of your comfort zone?
As for your example, I have more than a handful myself (of other people I know), and I don't work in that field; thus your insinuation and single example are not sufficient to convince me that you do. Sorry if that ruffles your jimmies, but perhaps you should try being more forward?
How about you go down to your local family court and watch what happens for a few weeks/months and get back to me? I'll wait, the comments will even stay open that long. The fact that you think there isn't "fuck-all" you can do about it, really means squat since there *are* things you could be doing. Now let's keep in mind that your definition of "shitty person" really means nothing. Absolutely nothing at all, you continue to fail to understand the basics that in a witch hunt your view means squat. On the other side, "shitty person" means a person that some women scorned has a grudge against, and that's been going on for years.
Oh wait, wait, you're too busy chasing your strawman to look in the reality of higher education fraud, but have to cloak it with disingenuous complaints.
No, I pointed out a fact. You just don't happen to understand just how broken the university system currently is. That of course isn't my problem, but why don't you go take a look around and get back to everyone.
Might be something to think about when people are screaming the idea that working in fast-food is a starter job, not expected to pay well, something people move on from, don't think about it...
Except it is, and was. Except when there are no FT jobs, that "starter job" becomes a "mainstream job." Now round this out with the economic policies of say the Liberal Party(Ontario) and Federal(Canada) which punish industries from opening up, but heavily support service industries. Now what do you have? A whole pile of service industry jobs that are low paying, and people taking multiple PT jobs to cover a single FT job.
You just said they have 3 jobs. Try to be consistent. That way you can actually start thinking about the problem rather than superficially declaring something based on no real knowledge of it.
That *is* consistent. I realize you think you're smart or something, but you have no actual grasp of the economics in places where the government is hostile to industry. Again that Liberal Party politics drove the price of electricity through the roof, implemented barriers for companies to open if they were industry(factory, automobiles, consumer goods, etc), implemented tax plans that were hostile to those same industries. Now think really hard why you'd open a business in say Ontario, when you can do the same in New York, or Michigan, pay 1/3 the cost or less for electricity and the tax rate is *less* then what you'd pay in Ontario. Even with the business tax rate where it was before Trump's tax cuts.
Slashdot Mirror
So why don't you tell everyone why a bureaucrat in Washington DC., should be the one to decide where a new hospital is built. I'm not sure what's worse, that Canadian provinces have more control over healthcare decisions then US states, or you bringing up "ye olde Somalia" bullshit because that's the very definition of spewing ignorant talking points like a parrot.
Since when are you the person who defines what being a Republican means? Maybe it's you guys on the extreme right who are RINOs as most are far more moderate then you.
"Extreme right" aka constitutionalist that believes it's not a "living breathing document", holds "pro-gun" views, doesn't like censorship, and believes that "smaller government" and "state rights" should be the primary drivers.
Why would they write a new bill from the ground up and start fresh building support for it?
Ask yourself the question: "Why do I want to support a bill which has the backing of organizations that are actively censoring."
Also, do you not see the irony of complaining about people screeching "nazi" and the immediately, in the very same sentence, screeching "nazi" yourself?
No, because I'm using the left's definition of "nazi." If the left wants to screech that Richard Spencer is a nazi for being an ethnonationalist, and the democrats vote in a person who's an ethonationalist. They are by their own definition a nazi.
Only if you have a ridiculously far right notion of what it means to be a republican (which you clearly do). RINO is a pathetic attempt to apply a purity test to a member of the party. By today's standards Reagan would be called a RINO. Heaven forbid someone attempt to have a fruitful negotiation with someone they don't agree with complete. Or *gasp* actually compromise about anything.
That makes absolutely no sense, I like how you tossed in "far-right". Especially since Reagan is far more conservative then the current party. If Regan ran today, the left would be screeching that he's Hitler reborn from the ashes.(never mind that many of the talking points from the 1980's are the same as today) A RINO by definition is a person who's "riding on the party name and voting on the opposite side of the isle." McCain is the classic example of someone who preaches that they're a conservative and votes ideologically opposite of it. That's not a purity test in the least. That's the classic of "bad faith politics."
You know what "far-left" looks like? When you have members of the DNC saying "my job is to shut white people up" or when members and party leaders hold pro-segregation views. You know, "this space is only for PoC" for example.
Those people named? They're not moderates or conservatives. They're RINO's, much like how many of the democrats today are DINO's or if you prefer, batshit insane crazy progressives in both cases or people out to enrich themselves at the taxpayer expense. What should really bother people is that democrats want to push back the old system that was broken in the first place, chalk full of regulations and *not* NN. Instead of say writing a bill from the ground up that's simple and clear. If the democrats could do that, without attaching 240 riders to, you could even get Rand Paul to join in on it. And Rand Paul is far closer to an actual Liberal(not the modern corrupted version) then any democrat sitting today and has a lot of pull with multiple groups on the right.
And since this is going to dive headlong into politics, maybe democrats would like to explain two things: First why did your party decide to embrace the neo-cons with open arms when tea party groups drove them out and told them to piss off. What you didn't notice the suddenly pro-war, we need more war, more war is always good people? Have you been paying attention? You know those guys, people like David "The Republican Party is dead!" Frum or in simple terms, they threw my ass out because all I wanted was war to enrich my friends. Second, why did democrats decide to go "more of the same" by following Clintons path? While at the same time not squashing the people who've been screeching *insert people are nazis* when the current deputy chair has openly advocated for a black ethnostate(aka he's an actual nazi).
Toronto just thinks they're the capital of Canada.
Nuclear isn't built on the idea that it requires storage. Nuclear is built on the idea that it carries total base load, or near base load. Most nuclear power plants are based around the idea that they'll carry between 70-85% of all grid demands at all times. It's the "fast spinup" plants that cover peak, over-demand and so on. That's coal, hydroelectric, natural gas. Wind/solar? Wind has to blow meaning if it's not, it has to rely on storage to balance load. Solar the sun has to shine, doesn't work out very well in a lot of places where you see 2/3's of the year with cloud cover or the panels are covered in snow and again requires batteries to carry that load.
Uh not even close. The bid prices in the US for solar are around 0.188kWh around 0.30kWh for solar. Coal however does come in at around 0.032kWh however. If you use batteries for load balancing? Double that. Triple it if it's a combined solar/wind battery balancing system. Those prices are still half of what we pay in Canada. It still is cheaper to build a coal power plant, it is still cheaper to flood thousands of KM of land and build a dam. Kinda like what they're doing out in BC, where there are no lack of passes for wind. And it's *still* cheaper to build a brand new hydroelectric dam.
Ask yourself why the political left spent the last ~17 years screeching that anyone who doesn't believe the same stuff as them are "racists, sexists, homophobic, islamophobic" and have now moved onto labeling anyone who doesn't believe what they do, are "nazis"
Plain old mechanical mercury switch is good for around 70-90 years after the initial test, and require no secondary yearly testing as long as the mercury hasn't leaked. And that it can along with the wiring be checked with a spot inspection. They're still used in a lot of stuff, that require one-off emergency trip fails. One of the heavy industry companies I worked for exclusively used them as part of the auto-stop system in the event of an emergency. Because they always work, sure mercury is toxic, it hurts the environment. But when you want a 99.99999% of there being zero failure? Sometimes old tech is still best tech.
You think that's good? Just wait until the car can make the decision whether or not you're a higher or lower priority in the event of a crash, and whether or not while "talking" with the other vehicles about to crash that they decide to collectively kill you because someone else has a better chance of surviving.
Well, I answered that in a separate (and relatively short) thread, which I also re-read. Nope. No suggestions as to what I might do to help the cause. They're not there, because you never made them. So, how about dropping few now?
You mean where I pointed out that there's a lack of DV shelters? That the legal system holds lopsided views? Where HR dept's, act in a manner against one particular party? Those are all suggestions to where you can "help the cause." I don't know where you live, and in turn left it vague. You have to get off your ass and look up things locally because in the real world, people don't hold your hand. This is something you should have already figured out if you are, what you actually say.
Further, whataboutism is a term used to compat the handwaving of others. Do you not see how "they do it, too" is a handwaving maneuver? It is, it's designed to deflect responsibility by saying it should be okay for you to do something because someone else also does that thing; the intent of pointing out when that happens (e.g. calling out whataboutism) is to open up the conversation and basically say "okay, yes, let's discuss that and what you're doing, then"; that's basically the opposite of handwaving. You, however, seem to not want to discuss things openly, preferring to hide behind purposefully misleading questions and non-answers.
And you seem to be doing a really good job of handwaving, not only that but you've also managed to not read anything. And in your absolute haste twice in a row, you've managed to miss things that are plain. Maybe go back and read a third time, and you'll figure it out? Or maybe you're just happier when you're tucking tail instead of dealing with a two-fold problem. Both the witch-hunt mentality, and the absolute lack and obvious need to deal with women who also fall into that same category.
Wave away, my friend. Oh, and don't bother emailing me; you don't deserve to know what I've been through.
Victimhood as a currency is on the way out, you might want to try cashing in now.
Why am I wasting time with a troll?
You should be asking yourself that question. Are you so upset at the idea of voter-id that you have to throw a hissyfit?
Yeah, a simple search of the fake news. In the REAL world when they investigated the claims of vote fraud, the most partisan investigators the GOP could find just couldn't find the evidence. It's fundamentally impossible to conceal a conspiracy involving lots of people.
You don't need a conspiracy involving "lots of people" you only need individual actors who are swayed by a "community leader" to make something happen. Funny how there's plenty of cases that have ended up in the courts, of course the courts are just fake news too right?
Election fraud is quite different. Let's take partisan gerrymandering as an example. The essential trick involves 2 principles: #1: Draw lines so your districts are safe. #2: Waste your opponent's votes are concentrated into the smallest number of sacrificial districts.
Yeah and both parties should be blasted to shit for it. But both parties do it, and some of the worst examples however just happen to be in the richest democrat held cities too. Though there are a few republican, and surprise when those republicans gain power they immediately flip it. Maybe you could get off your ass instead of whining, and do something proactive about it right? Or would that be too much work?
You've gotta go back decades before you find even half-way plausible stories to that effect.
And yet a simple search and you can find hundreds of stories from the 2016 and 2012 elections where people voted illegally sometimes dozens of times. You can even find cases of pollworkers fraudulently interfering in elections. The real question is, if those are the people getting caught because they're sloppy, how many don't get caught?
As a point, Canada requires voter ID. Requires a few pieces no less to prove that you're voting in the right area too. Even then we have cases of voter fraud. So you tell me, in a country like the US where democrats and progressives fight tooth and nail against any type of ID - something that every other western nation requires, how many cases aren't being caught?
The same way as in Canada, the CRTC(same as FCC) is an independent body(crown corp) from the government but also run by the government. The CRTC is answerable to parliament, PM and minister of industry. They're independent because the existing laws require that the organizations have to "overstep" massively to be accountable to the governing body. The people who are actually in charge are the hired bureaucrats, the people who keep watch are the ones appointed by the PMO's office or parliament to make sure those bureaucrats aren't stepping over the line either.
Here's an example: In Canada, internet is regulated by the CRTC and "classified" as such. Back oh 7-8 years ago, the current head of the CRTC at the behest of Bell, Rogers, and Telus tried to reclassify "last mile" for TPIA's(third party companies that lease the last mile from them), and up the amount that those TPIA's would have to pay. It would make a 25/1Mbps plan go from $49 to $90-120/mo. The TPIA industry is larger then what most people think in Canada, and it's profitable more or less even when 60% of that $49 goes directly to the last mile operator for the lease. This was a case of the CRTC overstepping it's bounds and breaking one of the foundational rules that they exist to *serve* the public and protect consumers from industry overstep. It basically came down to a staring contest between the CRTC and Parliament. With the PMO's office openly stating that if the CRTC did increase those rates, they'd introduce new laws and regulations stripping the CRTC of regulatory power. The CRTC blinked first, rules remain unchanged, etc, etc.
No need, we've been on the same page there this whole time. You're just too blinded by ignorant rage to see it.
There's some more assumptions, maybe you need to stop projecting.
I didn't say there was fuck all I could do about it, I said there was fuck all I could do about it other than what I'm already doing . That said... There are things I could be doing, such as? This is a chance to further your cause rather than just slinging thinly-veiled insults.
I mentioned those already, why don't you go re-read my other posts. Then again I'm following your lead. Remember? You were the one that started slinging those thinly veiled insults.
Yet you believe your views matter. How quaint.
How ignorant and arrogant does someone have to be to dismiss another persons views without actually answering them? Maybe you should oh what's that phrase you used? Ah right, "go look in the mirror."
You're right. None of this is anything particularly new, it's been going on for at least as long as I've been alive, yet we've gotten on just fine for decades. In fact, if we expand the scope beyond the current witch hunt, we've had one or another going on for the entirety of human history. You can lose sleep over it all you want, but it's really just business as usual.
Oh look, shall we apply your favorite word? "whataboutism" gee, why oh why can't you stay on topic. For someone who doesn't have a vested interest in actually making sure that things are impartial, you sure are arguing pretty hard for the status-quo, or going by your own words in several posts that the current "listen and believe" isn't a problem.
I'd love to see one shred of objective evidence to support that -- if you have one.
See the current cases against Yale and Harvard. Or one of the dozens of articles on it, this isn't new or unknown. That's not even touching on the "affirmative action" bullshit with SAT scores, where blacks and mexicans are give massive point boosts simply because they're black or mexican. While asians and whites are punished and have points removed.
Basically if you're asian or white, you need to do twice to four times better then anyone else to land a position. Seriously, there's real racism going on here. But it's sure not in whites or asians favor.
I'm trying to remember the actual case, but I'm pretty sure it ran down like this. Person from India or Pakistan, came to Canada with a mechanical engineering degree. The requirements in Canada require that if you get a degree out-of-country you have to submit to reexamination. Went all the way to court, and the court said nope, you're just doing that because of his race. The examination rules were rewritten to get around that particular court case and still require reexamination.
If there's one thing you can be sure of, it's that in today's hypersensitivity of "you're only doing this because x, reason so I don't have to follow your rules!" bullshit, you can be sure that there's a judge somewhere that will agree with that "progressive agenda" and put people at risk.
The cheapest place to buy gasoline in all of Canada is in the province of Alberta, where it is currently sitting at about $1cdn per liter, which works out to $3.50 usd/gallon. Where I live, the price is over $5 usd/gallon.
So you're in a remote location but that's a problem? But let's also convert the price, it's actually $2.99/USD/gallon for fuel in Alberta(Pop 4m), that's because you forgot the conversion. In Ontario(pop 14.7m) however, you can easily hit $5/USD/gallon. Bread is also $8/loaf, and it's $40 for 24 cans of coke or pepsi in that location. Most prices for fuel in the US is around 2.25/USD/gal to $2.80/gal. Which works out to being $2.84/CAD/gal to $3.51CAD/gallon.
Right now, gas is running about $1.20/l or $4.50/gal Canadian. Or $3.59Gal USD in most of Ontario.
But I am also aware that if just saying "London" without a qualifier, the London should be assumed.
Only when you're trying to save face and all the other cities named were Canadian.
"Whataboutism" gee as if you can't figure it out.
Whataboutism, again; and incorrect whataboutism, at that. I simply sensed projection and called it out.
Why not actually address something instead? Right, that's too difficult. Maybe less buzzwords made up by media personalities for hand-waving, and more critical thinking.
Perhaps I figured, if that were the case, it would have come up by now. At this point you've still only insinuated it, so I'll continue on believing that to not be the case.
Assumption based on nothing. Time for you to go read up some case law perhaps? Read some news papers outside of your comfort zone?
As for your example, I have more than a handful myself (of other people I know), and I don't work in that field; thus your insinuation and single example are not sufficient to convince me that you do. Sorry if that ruffles your jimmies, but perhaps you should try being more forward?
How about you go down to your local family court and watch what happens for a few weeks/months and get back to me? I'll wait, the comments will even stay open that long. The fact that you think there isn't "fuck-all" you can do about it, really means squat since there *are* things you could be doing. Now let's keep in mind that your definition of "shitty person" really means nothing. Absolutely nothing at all, you continue to fail to understand the basics that in a witch hunt your view means squat. On the other side, "shitty person" means a person that some women scorned has a grudge against, and that's been going on for years.
What about people with non fictitious degrees?
Why not ask why those degrees actually exist in the first place, and you can get a masters in them.
Oh wait, wait, you're too busy chasing your strawman to look in the reality of higher education fraud, but have to cloak it with disingenuous complaints.
No, I pointed out a fact. You just don't happen to understand just how broken the university system currently is. That of course isn't my problem, but why don't you go take a look around and get back to everyone.
Might be something to think about when people are screaming the idea that working in fast-food is a starter job, not expected to pay well, something people move on from, don't think about it...
Except it is, and was. Except when there are no FT jobs, that "starter job" becomes a "mainstream job." Now round this out with the economic policies of say the Liberal Party(Ontario) and Federal(Canada) which punish industries from opening up, but heavily support service industries. Now what do you have? A whole pile of service industry jobs that are low paying, and people taking multiple PT jobs to cover a single FT job.
You just said they have 3 jobs. Try to be consistent. That way you can actually start thinking about the problem rather than superficially declaring something based on no real knowledge of it.
That *is* consistent. I realize you think you're smart or something, but you have no actual grasp of the economics in places where the government is hostile to industry. Again that Liberal Party politics drove the price of electricity through the roof, implemented barriers for companies to open if they were industry(factory, automobiles, consumer goods, etc), implemented tax plans that were hostile to those same industries. Now think really hard why you'd open a business in say Ontario, when you can do the same in New York, or Michigan, pay 1/3 the cost or less for electricity and the tax rate is *less* then what you'd pay in Ontario. Even with the business tax rate where it was before Trump's tax cuts.
Have you figured this out yet?