I asked my MP about this and she told me to kill myself. (She was really nice about it though)
Maybe I'm thinking about it wrong, but didn't Blue beetle just come out and Barbie has been out for like a month? It's not like either one of these movies is one of those slow burn movies where this very well made but not very well known movie slowly builds up steam. They're both part of the establishment Hollywood system, with massive marketing budgets behind them...
The last 6 years would have been a lot different if trump was a better judge of character
If that were the case, then there wouldn't be any school shootings. You might be too young to remember, but I remember 2008 where a strong Democrat president was in charge, and in 2009 they ended up with a majority in the house and a supermajority in the Senate so they could end any filibuster.
That seems to be the case with both political parties, once they actually get power they're like a dog chasing a car who catches up to it and doesn't know what to do with it.
That seems to be the case with both political parties, once they actually get power they're like a dog chasing a car who catches up to it and doesn't know what to do with it.
There are a lot of societies with guns that don't have mass shootings. Commonplace mass shootings for whatever reason are a uniquely American phenomenon.
My hypothesis rolls around two different things.
The first, not the guns themselves, but the attitude towards the guns. I don't know of anywhere else on Earth that guns are considered as a very first resort sort of solution to problems with other people. Canada only very rarely has school shootings, and it's considered to be a big deal if they do happen. And Europe has had some school shootings as well, they do happen other areas of the world just not as commonly. But you can see it even in the gangs that come to Canada from the us. Canadian gangs are very rarely used firearms, but American gangs are coming in through toronto, and they're bringing their American gun culture with them, and now more and more we're seeing criminals carrying guns in canada.
The second, is the overprescription of antidepressants. I've conceptualized antidepressants as emotional morphine. Whatever you are feeling gets the volume turned down. Now in the case of negative emotions like depression, that might be a good thing. But sometimes those emotions are things like discussed at the idea of going to shoot up your school. It's one of the same reasons that suicide rates are so much higher amongst people who are prescribed antidepressants, because the powerful emotion that would stop someone has been repressed by the drug.
In switzerland, every able-bodied man between certain ages has a military rifle at home in case they get conscripted into military service. So obviously just having guns around doesn't automatically cause these things, because Switzerland has a very low instance of gun crime.
My hypothesis rolls around two different things.
The first, not the guns themselves, but the attitude towards the guns. I don't know of anywhere else on Earth that guns are considered as a very first resort sort of solution to problems with other people. Canada only very rarely has school shootings, and it's considered to be a big deal if they do happen. And Europe has had some school shootings as well, they do happen other areas of the world just not as commonly. But you can see it even in the gangs that come to Canada from the us. Canadian gangs are very rarely used firearms, but American gangs are coming in through toronto, and they're bringing their American gun culture with them, and now more and more we're seeing criminals carrying guns in canada.
The second, is the overprescription of antidepressants. I've conceptualized antidepressants as emotional morphine. Whatever you are feeling gets the volume turned down. Now in the case of negative emotions like depression, that might be a good thing. But sometimes those emotions are things like discussed at the idea of going to shoot up your school. It's one of the same reasons that suicide rates are so much higher amongst people who are prescribed antidepressants, because the powerful emotion that would stop someone has been repressed by the drug.
In switzerland, every able-bodied man between certain ages has a military rifle at home in case they get conscripted into military service. So obviously just having guns around doesn't automatically cause these things, because Switzerland has a very low instance of gun crime.
Do you know if communities federate across instances? If so, I'll host a copy to keep my "host your own shit" mantra going.
Shit should be a first amendment violation.
Why should parents be forced to pledge allegiance to some insane new age religion?
Why should parents be forced to pledge allegiance to some insane new age religion?
To be fair, the median salaried employee didn't engage in a psy-op so successful it got leftists to simp for big pharma. He probably deserves a raise!
You're definitely missing key facts, and you're wrong on others.
One of the core tenets of the Maguinty liberals green energy plan was massively overpaying for electrical power from Green energy. In 2011, the guaranteed amount provided for a certain set period of time was 80 cents, and in 2012 they changed that to 50.4 cents. They ended up signing contracts that were 20 years at the agreed upon rate.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-to-cut-rates-paid-for-wind-solar-power-1.1157717
What you said about the prices of electricity in Canada is simply wrong. If you are paying attention to Saskatchewan and alberta, then Ontario is competitive. But at no point have I been referring to Alberta or saskatchewan which are mostly fossil fuels. I've been referring to all the different provinces that utilize hydroelectric power. Quebec, Manitoba, British columbia, and Newfoundland are all almost entirely renewables, those renewables are primarily hydroelectricity, and almost all of them have significantly lower electricity prices than Ontario (Newfoundland is an outlier I believe is caused by the fact that Labrador has all the hydro and Newfoundland is isolated)
https://www.hydroquebec.com/data/documents-donnees/pdf/comparison-electricity-prices.pdf
Here's some data on electric heat. It shows that two thirds of homes the province with the most hydroelectricity in the lowest electricity prices are heated with electric.
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-402-x/2007/1741/ceb1741_003-eng.htm
About 45% of Canada's carbon emissions come from burning fossil fuels to release energy, and that includes for building heating.
The real-world data speaks for itself. Several provinces are at 90%+ renewable electricity generation and have lower electricity prices than the other provinces. That's achievable using hydroelectric today, without magical thinking or praying for new technological innovations.
One of the core tenets of the Maguinty liberals green energy plan was massively overpaying for electrical power from Green energy. In 2011, the guaranteed amount provided for a certain set period of time was 80 cents, and in 2012 they changed that to 50.4 cents. They ended up signing contracts that were 20 years at the agreed upon rate.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-to-cut-rates-paid-for-wind-solar-power-1.1157717
What you said about the prices of electricity in Canada is simply wrong. If you are paying attention to Saskatchewan and alberta, then Ontario is competitive. But at no point have I been referring to Alberta or saskatchewan which are mostly fossil fuels. I've been referring to all the different provinces that utilize hydroelectric power. Quebec, Manitoba, British columbia, and Newfoundland are all almost entirely renewables, those renewables are primarily hydroelectricity, and almost all of them have significantly lower electricity prices than Ontario (Newfoundland is an outlier I believe is caused by the fact that Labrador has all the hydro and Newfoundland is isolated)
https://www.hydroquebec.com/data/documents-donnees/pdf/comparison-electricity-prices.pdf
Here's some data on electric heat. It shows that two thirds of homes the province with the most hydroelectricity in the lowest electricity prices are heated with electric.
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-402-x/2007/1741/ceb1741_003-eng.htm
About 45% of Canada's carbon emissions come from burning fossil fuels to release energy, and that includes for building heating.
The real-world data speaks for itself. Several provinces are at 90%+ renewable electricity generation and have lower electricity prices than the other provinces. That's achievable using hydroelectric today, without magical thinking or praying for new technological innovations.
Were you at all aware of all the sweetheart deals the green energy guys got? They were getting like 50 cents a kilowatt hour at one point (sold for 4 cents a kilowatt hour wholesale), and those particular contracts were locked in for like 25 years. It's obvious that doing that is going to have to get paid for somehow, and guess how it got paid for? The ratepayers. Hydro rates shot up.
That harmed people. You can keep on pretending that the last 20 years didn't happen, but they did. In Ontario isn't the only place that happened. I used to heat my home with electric in a very far North community where I didn't have much of a choice. Electricity rates climbed up a very quickly over the past 20 years, and now a lot of people are looking at replacing their electric heaters with fossil fuels because the cost of electric has gone up so much compared to general inflation.
This is only difficult if you're trying making it hard intentionally. Otherwise it's really easy: to get people to stop using fossil fuels, you need abundant inexpensive green energy, people will use that energy because it makes the most sense. The sort of inexpensive abundant green energy that has been powering Quebec and Manitoba for a century. The sort of inexpensive abundant green energy that until the 1970s was the workhorse of Ontario electrical production. The inexpensive green energy used abundantly in British Columbia and Newfoundland. It's something that Canada has in Mass abundance, we just need to use it. And then, Canada can become one of the world leaders in green energy, the per capita carbon footprint drops, and with enough energy we can gain a competitive advantage producing normally carbon intensive things using green energy, helping us punch above our weight and take some of the dirtiest energy production in the world in Chinas coal power plants offline.
That harmed people. You can keep on pretending that the last 20 years didn't happen, but they did. In Ontario isn't the only place that happened. I used to heat my home with electric in a very far North community where I didn't have much of a choice. Electricity rates climbed up a very quickly over the past 20 years, and now a lot of people are looking at replacing their electric heaters with fossil fuels because the cost of electric has gone up so much compared to general inflation.
This is only difficult if you're trying making it hard intentionally. Otherwise it's really easy: to get people to stop using fossil fuels, you need abundant inexpensive green energy, people will use that energy because it makes the most sense. The sort of inexpensive abundant green energy that has been powering Quebec and Manitoba for a century. The sort of inexpensive abundant green energy that until the 1970s was the workhorse of Ontario electrical production. The inexpensive green energy used abundantly in British Columbia and Newfoundland. It's something that Canada has in Mass abundance, we just need to use it. And then, Canada can become one of the world leaders in green energy, the per capita carbon footprint drops, and with enough energy we can gain a competitive advantage producing normally carbon intensive things using green energy, helping us punch above our weight and take some of the dirtiest energy production in the world in Chinas coal power plants offline.
A party voted in to end green policies that were harming common people ending green policies that were harming common people isn't incompetence. And when the party that created those policies are so badly pantsed that they aren't even a real political party anymore that isn't some fringe group of radicals who voted against them.
I've warned before that there are political consequences for ignoring the reality of the common man. Keep on pretending reality doesn't exist and denying reality people experience, a guy like Ford will be PM and do exactly what he's elected to do.
I've warned before that there are political consequences for ignoring the reality of the common man. Keep on pretending reality doesn't exist and denying reality people experience, a guy like Ford will be PM and do exactly what he's elected to do.