|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On June 06 2016 22:16 JimmyJRaynor wrote: we're now in a legal gray zone for assisted death in Canada. c-14 won't be passed for a while.
Well done, NDP... This one's on them, for wasting Parliament's time on Elbowgate.
|
nah, junior over reacted to standard opposition posturing on too tight of a timeline; a timeline set by the liberals to meet a deadline known about for 365 days. later on the NDP over played their hand, but it was already too late when they did that.
let's see if C-14 even gets past the senate. of course, you can then blame them as well along with their frivolous concerns about whether or not the bill is even constitutional. who cares whether it is constitutional or not, right? http://globalnews.ca/news/2743221/canadas-doctor-assisted-dying-law-unconstitutional-expert/?sf28043161=1
|
On June 07 2016 12:49 JimmyJRaynor wrote:nah, junior over reacted to standard opposition posturing on too tight of a timeline; a timeline set by the liberals to meet a deadline known about for 365 days. later on the NDP over played their hand, but it was already too late when they did that. let's see if C-14 even gets past the senate. of course, you can then blame them as well along with their frivolous concerns about whether or not the bill is even constitutional. who cares whether it is constitutional or not, right? http://globalnews.ca/news/2743221/canadas-doctor-assisted-dying-law-unconstitutional-expert/?sf28043161=1
The Supreme Court did a great job shutting down Harper's overreach. I have confidence they'll get it right should C-14 ever be challenged to that extent.
|
On June 04 2016 05:50 CorsairHero wrote:
Ukraine's first tweet
I.
What.
|
On June 07 2016 19:17 Fprime wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 12:49 JimmyJRaynor wrote:nah, junior over reacted to standard opposition posturing on too tight of a timeline; a timeline set by the liberals to meet a deadline known about for 365 days. later on the NDP over played their hand, but it was already too late when they did that. let's see if C-14 even gets past the senate. of course, you can then blame them as well along with their frivolous concerns about whether or not the bill is even constitutional. who cares whether it is constitutional or not, right? http://globalnews.ca/news/2743221/canadas-doctor-assisted-dying-law-unconstitutional-expert/?sf28043161=1 The Supreme Court did a great job shutting down Harper's overreach. I have confidence they'll get it right should C-14 ever be challenged to that extent. C-14 is not a law. the supreme court has nothing to get right.
|
On June 07 2016 19:53 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 19:17 Fprime wrote:On June 07 2016 12:49 JimmyJRaynor wrote:nah, junior over reacted to standard opposition posturing on too tight of a timeline; a timeline set by the liberals to meet a deadline known about for 365 days. later on the NDP over played their hand, but it was already too late when they did that. let's see if C-14 even gets past the senate. of course, you can then blame them as well along with their frivolous concerns about whether or not the bill is even constitutional. who cares whether it is constitutional or not, right? http://globalnews.ca/news/2743221/canadas-doctor-assisted-dying-law-unconstitutional-expert/?sf28043161=1 The Supreme Court did a great job shutting down Harper's overreach. I have confidence they'll get it right should C-14 ever be challenged to that extent. C-14 is not a law. the supreme court has nothing to get right.
You implied in an earlier post that the assisted dying bill was unconstitutional. The Senate can vote up or down as they please on all bills passed by the House, but they are not empowered to determine what is or isn't constitutional. Their opinions on that front are just opinions. What is and what isn't unconstitutional is ultimately decided by the Supreme Court, and there's nothing wrong with having a discussion in the abstract about a potential challenge to the bill just because it hasn't been signed into law yet.
|
OTTAWA — Niki Ashton, an NDP MP from northern Manitoba, tweeted Sunday she was heading to North Dakota to campaign for U.S. Democratic Party candidate Bernie Sanders — even as the House of Commons continues to sit ahead of its summer break. Ashton tweeted, “We #FeelTheBern!” and included a picture of herself wearing a “Bernie For President” T-shirt. She tagged three other people in the tweet, including Canadian filmmaker Noam Gonick. Tank u for ur concern. Parliament does not sit on Sundays. https://t.co/RuOlq4gOzk — Niki Ashton (@nikiashton) June 5, 2016 The House of Commons hasn’t yet wrapped up for the year. It is scheduled to sit until June 23, though adjournment could happen earlier or later depending on the legislative agenda. Ashton isn’t technically breaking any rules in campaigning for the American candidate, assuming that she is paying for the trip on her own dime, but the tweet raised eyebrows. The National Post reached Ashton Monday morning during a plane layover in Toronto, on her way back to Ottawa from Winnipeg. “I’m definitely back at work today, and it wouldn’t be any other way,” she said. “It was a Sunday. The House doesn’t sit then.” Source
|
another great episode of "The Agenda". Steve Paikin interviews Dr. Ken Coates the co-author of "Dream Factories: Why Universities Won't Solve the Youth Jobs Crisis".
they discuss the abysmal state of university education in Canada. it'll be available online tomorrow. his solution is exactly what my solution has always been. Co-op education where you start working at 18 or 19. Waterloo rules.
http://tvo.org/programs/the-agenda-with-steve-paikin
Coates : "University education has become an intramural participation sport." rofl-copter.
On June 07 2016 21:23 Fprime wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 19:53 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On June 07 2016 19:17 Fprime wrote:On June 07 2016 12:49 JimmyJRaynor wrote:nah, junior over reacted to standard opposition posturing on too tight of a timeline; a timeline set by the liberals to meet a deadline known about for 365 days. later on the NDP over played their hand, but it was already too late when they did that. let's see if C-14 even gets past the senate. of course, you can then blame them as well along with their frivolous concerns about whether or not the bill is even constitutional. who cares whether it is constitutional or not, right? http://globalnews.ca/news/2743221/canadas-doctor-assisted-dying-law-unconstitutional-expert/?sf28043161=1 The Supreme Court did a great job shutting down Harper's overreach. I have confidence they'll get it right should C-14 ever be challenged to that extent. C-14 is not a law. the supreme court has nothing to get right. You implied in an earlier post that the assisted dying bill was unconstitutional. The Senate can vote up or down as they please on all bills passed by the House, but they are not empowered to determine what is or isn't constitutional. Their opinions on that front are just opinions. What is and what isn't unconstitutional is ultimately decided by the Supreme Court, and there's nothing wrong with having a discussion in the abstract about a potential challenge to the bill just because it hasn't been signed into law yet.
its not getting passed in its current state. it will change substantially before its passed. all the while some unfortunate families are in legal limbo. i don't think its that serious a matter. but it is unfortunate and it is due to a failure of the elected MPs.. some of which are liberal. again, though.. its not that important.. the economy is far more important.
|
Co-op education has to be the kind where they actually match you with a job. I did a co-op in high school and they were like:
"What do you want to do? Cool, we'll hook you up."
Then went to a College that bragged it was a co-op program but just amounted to me normally applying to jobs like you do when you graduate. Literally the only difference was you applied for the job through your coordinator and that you were mostly competing against other students. It was fucking awful.
|
On June 10 2016 10:21 killa_robot wrote: Co-op education has to be the kind where they actually match you with a job. I did a co-op in high school and they were like:
"What do you want to do? Cool, we'll hook you up."
Then went to a College that bragged it was a co-op program but just amounted to me normally applying to jobs like you do when you graduate. Literally the only difference was you applied for the job through your coordinator and that you were mostly competing against other students. It was fucking awful.
you probably should've done more research into the college's co-op program. i'd go with the University of Waterloo model. it works well. it does require a lot of hard work though.
|
On June 10 2016 09:57 JimmyJRaynor wrote:another great episode of "The Agenda". Steve Paikin interviews Dr. Ken Coates the co-author of "Dream Factories: Why Universities Won't Solve the Youth Jobs Crisis". they discuss the abysmal state of university education in Canada. it'll be available online tomorrow. his solution is exactly what my solution has always been. Co-op education where you start working at 18 or 19. Waterloo rules. http://tvo.org/programs/the-agenda-with-steve-paikinCoates : "University education has become an intramural participation sport." rofl-copter. Show nested quote +On June 07 2016 21:23 Fprime wrote:On June 07 2016 19:53 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On June 07 2016 19:17 Fprime wrote:On June 07 2016 12:49 JimmyJRaynor wrote:nah, junior over reacted to standard opposition posturing on too tight of a timeline; a timeline set by the liberals to meet a deadline known about for 365 days. later on the NDP over played their hand, but it was already too late when they did that. let's see if C-14 even gets past the senate. of course, you can then blame them as well along with their frivolous concerns about whether or not the bill is even constitutional. who cares whether it is constitutional or not, right? http://globalnews.ca/news/2743221/canadas-doctor-assisted-dying-law-unconstitutional-expert/?sf28043161=1 The Supreme Court did a great job shutting down Harper's overreach. I have confidence they'll get it right should C-14 ever be challenged to that extent. C-14 is not a law. the supreme court has nothing to get right. You implied in an earlier post that the assisted dying bill was unconstitutional. The Senate can vote up or down as they please on all bills passed by the House, but they are not empowered to determine what is or isn't constitutional. Their opinions on that front are just opinions. What is and what isn't unconstitutional is ultimately decided by the Supreme Court, and there's nothing wrong with having a discussion in the abstract about a potential challenge to the bill just because it hasn't been signed into law yet. its not getting passed in its current state. it will change substantially before its passed. all the while some unfortunate families are in legal limbo. i don't think its that serious a matter. but it is unfortunate and it is due to a failure of the elected MPs.. some of which are liberal. again, though.. its not that important.. the economy is far more important.
Agreed, it's not a very important issue (probably why they missed the SCoC's deadline...), and the government has bigger fish to fry. Personally, I'd love to see the federal government announce a large infrastructure project to improve our ability to export resources to both the Atlantic and Pacific, so as to reduce our dependence on the US economy. But that's probably a pipe dream.
I also like UWaterloo's co-op program, and wish more universities here would develop them. Canada's never had a problem producing graduates, we just suck at giving them job opportunities.
|
On June 10 2016 10:21 killa_robot wrote: Co-op education has to be the kind where they actually match you with a job. I did a co-op in high school and they were like:
"What do you want to do? Cool, we'll hook you up."
Then went to a College that bragged it was a co-op program but just amounted to me normally applying to jobs like you do when you graduate. Literally the only difference was you applied for the job through your coordinator and that you were mostly competing against other students. It was fucking awful.
The co-op I did for my biology program was pretty awesome, though. I got to immediately get involved in research on endangered fish populations, and my first co-op position ultimately led to my current PhD position through the contacts I fostered there. It worked basically exactly like how I imagined co-op should work.
Ours helped us get jobs, but there were also quite a few jobs (most, but not all, internal to the university) advertised/available to only co-op students. I totally recommend the co-op program I did, it was fantastic. Also, since we had more than the normal amount of work terms, I got to graduate debt free (with a bit of scholarship help).
10/10, would do again.
|
|
On June 10 2016 22:18 BallinWitStalin wrote: I got to graduate debt free (with a bit of scholarship help).
10/10, would do again. co-op worked well for me and all my work was in the private sector. graduated with 2+ years real world experience in 4 different cities ; had about 3 weeks of actual vacation time during each year. kinda like the real world. i graduated in 2009 debt free and with a 2000 Toyota Echo... talk about a woman magnet data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c81e3/c81e334f952fa6a3b77a0f55297a8c05972c04b5" alt=""
However, I don't want to get into an "i'm right because this happened to me" style of argument.
Dr. Ken Coates knows a lot more about this stuff than i do; i'm merely subscribing to his position on these matters. now the video i was referring to in my previous post is online and viewable.
http://tvo.org/video/programs/the-agenda-with-steve-paikin/deconstructing-higher-education
paikin hits it out of the park again with this interview.
|
|
|
|
The situation is not unique to Vancouver. New York and London both have many cases of prime property being bought and not inhabited.
I don't think it will change because Quebec probably doesn't give a shit about the prices in Vancouver and Toronto. Whatever paltry amount they earn from this investor program is free money with almost no downsides due to the 90% rate of leaving the province. From what I understand the (BC or Federal?) government actually has pulled the plug on foreign property investments, but Quebec is a bit of a loophole. They won't want to close this loophole either in the face of Montreal becoming as expensive as Toronto. edit: or the flow of money stopping entirely.
|
Vancouver fundamentals are certainly worse than NYC and London. They absolutely do not justify a 30% increase in prices year over year. The federal government did shut down the investor program which led to the rich people going through Quebec.
Their contribution to the economy is questionable as well seeing as how they pay $1400 in income tax and leave houses uninhabited in an area of low density.
|
They pay a loan of 800k to the Quebec government to come to Canada. That is a pretty substantial economic contribution. After they give the loan they're free to leave Quebec and make Vancouver/Toronto expensive. This $1400 of income tax hurts the provinces in which they own property, not Quebec.
|
|
|
|