Canadian Politics Megathread: That is simply not Trudeau

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Canadian Politics Megathread: That is simply not Trudeau

«‹›675 »

vyelkin: Jan 2, 2011

Yeah you can read it for yourself. Go to https://www.greenparty.ca click on 'Platform', click on 'Download Vision Green' and go to page 75. There it is:

http://www.greenparty.ca/sites/greenparty.ca/files/attachments/vision_green_2011en_1.pdf

the platform the loving green party ran on in the last federal election posted:

Expand healthcare coverage to include qualified complementary/alternative health professionals such as naturopaths, acupuncturists, homeopaths, licensed massage therapists, chiropractors, and dietitians.

# ? Jun 10, 2013 00:55

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 04:16

Team THEOLOGY: Nov 27, 2008

bunnyofdoom posted:

Or Anyone not named Marc Garneau.

Truth.

# ? Jun 10, 2013 00:55

vyelkin: Jan 2, 2011

bunnyofdoom posted:

You could have Baird for instance. Or Pollivair!

Or Anyone not named Marc Garneau.

Stephen Woodworth, literally the guy who introduced the private members bill trying to reopen the abortion debate, is the MP of the riding my parents live in, which I think of as home. :negative:

# ? Jun 10, 2013 00:58

Captain Vittles: Feb 12, 2008; I'm not a nerd! I'm a video game enthusiast.

cafel posted:

You know, I always wrote it off with out much thought because it's batshit crazy. Now that people have restated the main premise again in this thread, I just noticed a hole the size of a truck in the premise (well another one anyway). Let's take the idea that water memory works as a given. What about all the things you have in vanishingly small concentrations already? I mean any given glass of water will have had concentrations of heavy metals, rare nuclide of more common elements, and trace radioactive elements. All of these range from very low to vanishingly low concentrations, wouldn't all the negative effects being heavily amplified kill you? Or does only the beneficial stuff count in an even more blatant display of intellectual bankruptcy?

That water memory poo poo came way later than the dilution stuff. Homeopathy was conceived of in the 1790's; thought the dilution mechanism has been questionable for ages, the actual water memory controversy came about in the late 1980's. It was some half-assed nonsense intended to justify some wonky results in a paper which has never been reproduced to date, hence why the scientific community at large has continued to dismiss it as quackery.

Back on topic, I used to live in a riding that is pretty much guaranteed Liberal (Sydney-Victoria) so I used to vote Green in the vain hope their popular vote total would be high enough to get them federal funding which could then maybe make them a viable political entity. Then I read more about them, learning about wingnut poo poo like this and the wifi nonsense, and realized I didn't want them to be a viable political entity. I find this "We'll fund your alternative medicine because FAIRNESS" poo poo just as offensive as "We'll give massive tax cuts to your destructive business model because ECONOMY."

# ? Jun 10, 2013 00:58

Albino Squirrel: Apr 25, 2003; Miosis more like meiosis

Leofish posted:

But a lot of the criticism I've heard of Insite, et al. is that it isn't safe, and that it doesn't provide addiction counselling, or rehab services, or that the people who use it don't take advantage of those services, that they just shoot up in the street with dirty needles later, that the drugs they bring in aren't safe, or are laced with other things, and that the blocks surrounding it turn into crime havens because of the no-cop zone.

I just find this entire debate confusing. Is it just ideology that's blocking this, on the perception that addicts aren't really people? Does it work, or doesn't it?

It's just ideology, and it does work - at least as regards saving lives. In my experience most opioid addicts want to quit on some level, but various factors (such as wanting to avoid getting dope sick, or wanting to avoid dealing with the almost uniformly horrendous circumstances in which they find themselves) keep them using. Ideally, you'd be able to get someone stabilized on other opioids like methadone, but that doesn't work for everyone. In that case, if someone's going to be using, they're far less likely to die if they're injecting in a supervised location using clean needles.

Yes, the drugs they bring in aren't always safe, but that's why the safe injection site exists, so that a misjudged dose can be counteracted with antidotes. There's actually some interesting studies ongoing in Switzerland (IIRC) where addicts are provided with clean heroin, on the logic that at least you know what they're putting in their bodies. I don't see why someone would 'just shoot up with dirty needles later' - addicts, despite everything, aren't stupid and will use clean needles if the option exists and is readily accessible.

vvv No, that's how you treat a ganglion.

Albino Squirrel fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Jun 10, 2013

# ? Jun 10, 2013 01:00

angerbot: Mar 23, 2004; plob

I think you all are missing the important point of succussion, which is hitting the thing you are diluting with a bible every now and then.

# ? Jun 10, 2013 01:10

Stephen Harper: Apr 13, 2011; Canada is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it.

vyelkin posted:

Yeah you can read it for yourself. Go to https://www.greenparty.ca click on 'Platform', click on 'Download Vision Green' and go to page 75. There it is:

http://www.greenparty.ca/sites/greenparty.ca/files/attachments/vision_green_2011en_1.pdf

Chiropractors and acupuncturists are also mostly quacks too in my experience. My friends who visit naturopaths are routinely treated with homeopathic medicine.

# ? Jun 10, 2013 01:32

Blade_of_tyshalle: Jul 12, 2009; If you think that, along the way, you're not going to fail... you're blind.

There's no one I've ever met, no matter how successful they are, who hasn't said they had their failures along the way.

Diluting with a Bible? I don't think you're talking about the same fake medicine as we are.

e: acupuncture is a big ol' bag of crap which has been shown to be no more effective than being poked with sharp toothpicks. It's a placebo methodology. At least chiro might give you a nice massage, until the practitioner decides he's going to snap your neck because your bad vision is being caused by a subluxation he just has to correct before you develop testicular cancer. :tinfoil:

Blade_of_tyshalle fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Jun 10, 2013

# ? Jun 10, 2013 01:32

Sovy Kurosei: Oct 9, 2012

Albino Squirrel posted:

Also - and not to derail the homeopathy derail - I find myself living in Laurie Hawn's riding. He seems like at least a reasonably decent and honest guy, albeit one who I'd disagree with on a number of points. Am off base here, THEOLOGY?

I used to live in Laurie Hawn's riding. I sent him an email about something or other and now I'm on the CPC mailing list for everything. He posts a monthly/bimonthly newsletter called the Hawn Report and is very active on the internet for a guy his age.

When push comes to shove between Edmonton and the Conservative Party he has thrown the city under the bus. He is a party man through-and-through. Saying that he is one of the most active MPs in the Edmonton region and puts a lot of effort into reaching out to his constituents.

The MP for the current riding I am in doesn't put that kind of effort as Laurie Hawn has.

# ? Jun 10, 2013 04:28

Saalkin: Jun 29, 2008

vyelkin posted:

Stephen Woodworth, literally the guy who introduced the private members bill trying to reopen the abortion debate, is the MP of the riding my parents live in, which I think of as home.

I volunteered for Redman in 2008. She's a very nice person. gently caress Woodworth.

# ? Jun 10, 2013 13:29

Kafka Esq.: Jan 1, 2005; "If you ever even think about calling me anything but 'The Crab' I will go so fucking crab on your ass you won't even see what crab'd your crab" -The Crab(TM)

@Colinfreeze is extensively covering Canadian metadata mining, if you're interested. edit: Michael Geist is also on the case.

Here's something he wrote for G&M months ago, before the NSA story broke. edit 2: incidentally, this would explain CSEC's Taj Mahal, and the related building that seems to be a server farm.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/data-collection-program-got-green-light-from-mackay-in-2011/article12444909/#dashboard/follows/

quote:

Defence Minister Peter MacKay approved a secret electronic eavesdropping program that scours global telephone records and Internet data trails � including those of Canadians � for patterns of suspicious activity.

Mr. MacKay signed a ministerial directive formally renewing the government�s �metadata� surveillance program on Nov. 21, 2011, according to records obtained by The Globe and Mail. The program had been placed on a lengthy hiatus, according to the documents, after a federal watchdog agency raised concerns that it could lead to warrantless surveillance of Canadians.

There is little public information about the program, which is the subject of Access to Information requests that have returned hundreds of pages of records, with many passages blacked out on grounds of national security.

It was first explicitly approved in a secret decree signed in 2005 by Bill Graham, defence minister in Paul Martin�s Liberal government.

It is illegal for most Western espionage agencies to spy on their citizens without judicial authorization. But rising fears about foreign terrorist networks, coupled with the explosion of digital communications, have shifted the mandates of secretive electronic-eavesdropping agencies that were created by military bureaucracies to spy on Soviet states during the Cold War.

The Canadian surveillance program is operated by the Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC), an arm of the Department of National Defence.

In recent days, disclosures of secret surveillance programs operated by the U.S. National Security Agency have set off a storm of debate. Leaked documents and accounts have described an NSA project known as PRISM that allegedly gives the agency access to data from nine U.S. Internet companies including Google and Facebook. Another leaked document describes the existence of a government program that collects the �telephony metadata� surrounding millions of phone calls placed by Americans every day, without anyone listening to the actual conversations.

In Canada, a similar sensibility � though not the same sweep � appears to have also taken root. �Metadata is information associated with a telecommunication � And not a communication,� reads a PowerPoint briefing sent to Mr. MacKay in 2011. �Current privacy protection measures are adequate,� officials said, as they sought renewal of the Canadian metadata program.

CSEC and the NSA take pains to distinguish between the contents of a communication (which is out of bounds legally, if it involves a citizen) and the surrounding metadata (which is considered in play).

Mining metadata may never reveal what is said. But phone records, Internet Protocol addresses, and other data trails can reveal who knows whom, and how well. Authorities who suck up signals on a vast scale can use the metadata to create pictures of social networks, even terrorist cells, if they armed with enough raw computing power to sift through gigantic pools of data.

In Canada, a regime of ministerial directives � decrees not scrutinized by Parliament � have authorized the broad surveillance programs. How the data is obtained has not been disclosed in the documents obtained by The Globe or in comments from CSEC.

Officials do say that CSEC �incidentally� intercepts Canadian communications, but takes pain to purge or �anonymize� such data after it is obtained. Beyond that, �metadata is used to isolate and identify foreign communications, as CSEC is prohibited by law from directing its activities at Canadians,� wrote spokesman Ryan Foreman in an e-mail to The Globe.

CSEC is subject to oversight by a watchdog agency known as the Office of the CSE Commissioner, which has given broad approval to the metadata-mining program.

Five years ago, however, Justice Charles Gonthier, a retired Supreme Court judge, raised questions about the practice, according to government records released to The Globe.

Could CSEC, he asked, be wrongly passing along information to partner agencies, such as the RCMP or CSIS? While raw intelligence is sometimes allowed to pass between these agencies, Justice Gonthier�s broad concern was that CSEC�s metadata-mining efforts could be used as an end run around lawful warrants.

He wrote in a 2008 memo that ironing out such rules was important, since they set up �the legal requirement (e.g. ministerial authorization vs. a court warrant) in cases where activities may be �directed at� a Canadian.�

CSEC suspended its metadata-mining program for more than a year in 2008. The documents show that Mr. MacKay signed a new ministerial directive in 2011 to continue the surveillance under new rules � and also authorized other espionage programs, some of which have been completely censored from the Access to Information documents obtained by The Globe.

Kafka Esq. fucked around with this message at 14:39 on Jun 10, 2013

# ? Jun 10, 2013 14:24

unlimited shrimp: Aug 30, 2008

Kafka Esq. posted:

The problem with that metaphor is that means it's kind of none of our business?

What an odd definition of marriage you seem to have. If my spouse and I had an expectation of openness with our finances, then finding out my spouse had a secret massive bank account would be a Huge loving Deal, especially if their attitude was that it was 'none of my business'.

# ? Jun 10, 2013 16:49

Kafka Esq.: Jan 1, 2005; "If you ever even think about calling me anything but 'The Crab' I will go so fucking crab on your ass you won't even see what crab'd your crab" -The Crab(TM)

Ofc. Sex Robot BPD posted:

What an odd definition of marriage you seem to have. If my spouse and I had an expectation of openness with our finances, then finding out my spouse had a secret massive bank account would be a Huge loving Deal, especially if their attitude was that it was 'none of my business'.

I was thinking that the marriage partners were the conservative fund and the prime minister's office, not voters in general. So we're the noisy neighbours.

# ? Jun 10, 2013 17:01

Kafka Esq.: Jan 1, 2005; "If you ever even think about calling me anything but 'The Crab' I will go so fucking crab on your ass you won't even see what crab'd your crab" -The Crab(TM)

Team Theology, what do you think about this, and how does supporting the Conservatives mesh with a presumptive support for science? I assume since you work on the hill, this has been shared with you at least once.

http://scienceblogs.com/confessions/2013/05/20/the-canadian-war-on-science-a-long-unexaggerated-devastating-chronological-indictment/ (has links to all the different stories)

quote:

This is a brief chronology of the current Conservative Canadian government�s long campaign to undermine evidence-based scientific, environmental and technical decision-making. It is a government that is beholden to big business, particularly big oil, and that makes every attempt to shape public policy to that end. It is a government that fundamentally doesn�t believe in science. It is a government that is more interested in keeping its corporate masters happy than in protecting the environment.

As is occasionally my habit, I have pulled together a chronology of sorts. It is a chronology of all the various cuts, insults, muzzlings and cancellations that I�ve been able to dig up. Each of them represents a single shot in the Canadian Conservative war on science. It should be noted that not every item in this chronology, if taken in isolation, is necessarily the end of the world. It�s the accumulated evidence that is so damning.

Most of the items come from various links I�ve saved over the years as well as various other media articles I�ve dug up over the last week or so. This series at The Huffington Post has been particularly useful as has this article at the Wastershed Sentinal.

A long list of various environmental programs that the Harper government has discontinued or slashed funding to is here. I haven�t found individual media stories about all of them, so they aren�t in the list below. If you can help me find stories about some of those programs, etc, please let me know. As well, some stories are treated multiple times, with perhaps an initial story telling the big picture or introducing a large series of cuts and later stories fleshing out details.

Update 2013.05.27: Undated list of science or environmental libraries closed is here: Natural Resources Canada is set to close six of fourteen libraries in 2012-2013, Parks Canada will consolidate 5 libraries into one, Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. Undated list of women�s programs cut since 2006, including many science or health-related, including: Assisted Human Reproduction Canada, Atlantic Centre of Excellence for Women�s Health

Apr 2006. One Tonne Challenge funding stopped

Jan 2008. Office of National Science Adviser phased out
Jan 2008. Nuclear safety watchdog head fired for �lack of leadership�

Jun 2008. 16 Canadian lakes are slated to be officially but quietly �reclassified� as toxic dump sites for mines

Oct 2009. Document delivery outsourced at The Canada Institute for Scientific and Technical Information (national science library)

Feb 2010. Layoffs at The Canada Institute for Scientific and Technical Information

Mar 2010. Information restrictions brought in by government have severely restricted the media�s access to government researchers

Jun 2010. Statistics Canada discontinues the mandatory long form census
Jul 2010. AIDS funding announcement insufficient and disappointing, out of step with international community

Aug 2010. Cuts to Environment Canada weather-service programs have compromised the government�s ability to assess climate change and left it with a �profoundly disturbing� quality of information in its data network.

Mar 2011. NRC Press privatized to Canadian Science Publishing, removing Open Access to many articles
Mar 2011. NSERC reduces funding for basic research
Mar 2011. Tri-Council reallocates funds from discovery to industry research

Jun 2011. Blocks asbestos from hazardous chemicals list at UN summit

Jul 2011. Budget cuts to Climate Change and Clean Air, Substance and Waste Management, Weather and Environmental Services, Water Resources and Internal Services, Action Plan on Clean Water, the Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan, Chemicals Management Plan, the Clean Air Agenda, the Air Quality Health Index, Species at Risk Program
Jul 2011. NSERC Discovery Grants reduced

Oct 2011. Canadian Environmental Network closes

Dec 2011. Withdraw from the Kyoto Accord

Jan 2012. Natural Resources Minister accuses foreign radical environmentalists of hijacking the system

Feb 2012. Polar Environment Atmospheric Research Laboratory (PEARL) loses funding (later partial reprieve)
Feb 2012. Closure of Kitsilano Coast Guard station
Feb 2012. Canada threatens trade war with EU over tar sands, over the bloc�s plan to label oil from Alberta�s vast tar sands as highly polluting

Mar 2012. Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences closes
Mar 2012. Gutting the Fisheries Act

Apr 2012. Cereal Research Centre cut
Apr 2012. Muzzling of scientists at international conferences
Apr 2012. Repeal of Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, download to provinces
Apr 2012. Sustainable Water Management Division cut
Apr 2012. Transport Canada Aircraft Services cut
Apr 2012. The Centre for Plant Health relocated (later reprieve)
Apr 2012. Scientists monitored at polar conference
Apr 2012. National Aboriginal Health Organization�s funding cut
Apr 2012. Parks Canada cuts affect four national marine conservation areas
Apr 2012. 47 scientists and researchers at the NRC Institute for Biodiagnostics laid off in Winnipeg and Calgary.
Apr 2012. 2012 Budget cuts Women�s Health Contribution Program, Canadian Women�s Health Network, National Network on Environments and Women�s Health, Federal Tobacco Control Strategy
Apr 2012. 2012 Budget cuts Centre of Excellence at B.C. Children�s and Women�s hospitals in Vancouver, Quebec Network of Action for Women�s Health, Prairie Women�s Health Centre of Excellence

May 2012. 1000 jobs cut at Department of Fisheries and Oceans (details follow)
May 2012. Ocean Contaminants & Marine Toxicology Program axed.
May 2012. Centre for Offshore Oil & Gas Energy Research cut
May 2012. Freshwater Institute cut

May 2012. Centre for Off-shore Oil, Gas, and Energy Research cut
May 2012. Maurice-Lamontagne Institute cut
May 2012. Smokestacks Emissions Monitoring Team cut
May 2012. Cuts to NSERC Discovery, Major Resources Support and Research Tools and Instruments programs
May 2012. Mersey Biodiversity Centre slated for closure
May 2012. Transport Canada library closed
May 2012. Environment minister Peter Kent accuses environmental charities �laundering� foreign funds
May 2012. Killer whale expert out of work as Ottawa cuts ocean-pollution monitoring positions

Jun 2012. Eliminate Experimental Lakes Area program
Jun 2012. Addictions Research Centre cut

Jul 2012. Arctic Institute of North America�s Kluane Research Station cut

Aug 2012. Major Resources Support (MRS) Program Moratorium impacts National High Field Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Centre, the Canadian Centre for Isotopic Microanalysis and the Canadian Charged Particle Accelerator Consortium and others

Sep 2012. Revamp Species-at-Risk act

Oct 2012. DFO Habitat Management Program cut
Oct 2012. Declining grant success rate for Post Doctoral Fellows
Oct 2012. Ozone science group falls victim to government cuts
Oct 2012. Job cuts at NRC
Oct 2012. Navigable Waters Protection Act changed to weaken environmental oversight, changes sought by pipeline industry

Nov 2012. Bill C-45 weakens environmental laws and democracy, such as Navigable Waters Protection Act
Nov 2012. Salmon research lab run by Frederick Kibenge at the Atlantic Veterinary College-University of Prince Edward Island targeted
Nov 2012. Navigable Waters Protection Act altered to give developers more freedom to build around most Canadian rivers and lakes without obtaining permission from the federal government

Dec 2012. Eliminating the Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission

Jan 2013. Very long list of scientist muzzlings from Democracy Watch
Jan 2013. Canadian Space Agency battered by budget cuts, Steve MacLean leaves, sweeping changes expected
Jan 2013. Oil & Gas Industry thanks government for changing a series of environmental laws to advance �both economic growth and environmental performance.�

Feb 2013. Restrict how researchers can share data
Feb 2013. Department of Fisheries & Oceans muzzles its scientists
Feb 2013. Information commissioner investigates �Muzzling� of federal scientists, called a threat to democracy
Feb 2013. Prairies Regional Office: Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency closes

Mar 2013. Muzzling of scientists
Mar 2013. Experimental Lakes Area environmental research project loses funding
Mar 2013. The government votes against public science, basic research and the free and open exchange of scientific information are essential to evidence-based policy-making
Mar 2013. $100 million cut from Department of Fisheries & Oceans over three years
Mar 2013. National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy closes
Mar 2013. Centralizing, Slashing Federal Web Info
Mar 2013. Quit UN anti-drought convention
Mar 2013. Unnecessarily sabotaging ongoing research at the Experimental Lakes Area and deliberately robbing international and domestic scientist of the 2013 field season
Mar 2013. Environment Canada/Peter Kent give mixed messages to First Nations and oil industry about reform of conservation laws
Mar 1013. Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver says that Canadian oil imports are greenest option for US, as rationale for Keystone XL support
Mar 2013. Burrard Inlet Environmental Action Program and the Fraser River Estuary Management Program (BIEAP-FREMP) closing
Mar 2013. 2013 Budget cuts: Health Canada�s Controlled Substances and Tobacco Program, Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, Drug Treatment Funding Program, Drug Strategy Community Initiatives Fund, Public Health Agency of Canada, Patented Medicines Prices Review Board

Apr 2013. Create barrier to public participation in pipeline hearings
Apr 2013. Environment Canada name removed from its weather website, replaced with government promotional links
Apr 2013.Closure of Department of Fisheries & Oceans libraries
Apr 2013. Prime Minister & cabinet take over power to dictate collective bargaining and terms for other salaries and working conditions at the CBC and three other cultural or scientific Crown corporations
Apr 2013. Scientist at National Water Research Institute in Saskatoon muzzled
Apr 2013. Minister blames David Suzuki, Environmental Groups To Blame For Pipeline Opposition
Apr 2013. Minister of Natural Resources Joe Oliver condemns climatologist James Hansen, says he should be �ashamed� of his �exaggerated rhetoric� on exploitation of tar sands (and here)
Apr 2013. Conservative MP Ryan Leaf has been peddling what researchers describe as �bogus� information on polar bears and citing U.S. climate skeptics as experts on the iconic creatures
Apr 2013. Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver told the editorial board of Montreal�s La Presse newspaper that �people aren�t as worried as they were before about global warming of two degrees.�
Apr 2013. Agroforestry Development Centre wound down (and here)
Apr 2013. Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration with numerous environmental benefits closed
Apr 2013. Amends list of industrial projects requiring environmental reviews

May 2013. Minister of the Environment Peter Kent refuses to correct Conservative MP�s crackpot views on polar bears
May 2013. Minister of Natural Resources insults oil sands critics
May 2013. National Research Council overhauled to do business-friendly research rather than basic science
May 2013. Hundreds of jobs cut at Agriculture Canada
May 2013. Agriculture Canada cuts including Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration, Semi-Arid Prairie Agricultural Research Centre and various centres for beef and dairy research
May 2013. Free-speech report takes aim at Harper government�s �culture of secrecy�
May 2013. Bamfield Marine Sciences Centre budget reduced by a third
May 2013. Science, Technology and Innovation Council finds that Canada losing ground in global science race
May 2013. Astronaut MP Garneau snubbed at museum opening of Canadarm exhibit
May 2013. Government identifies PR challenge of promoting both energy efficiency & green programs at the same time as massively supporting oil & gas industry
May 2013. Prime Minister Harper tells US Keystone XL pipeline �needs to go ahead� � in spite of how bad an idea it is

Kafka Esq. fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Jun 10, 2013

# ? Jun 10, 2013 22:30

Team THEOLOGY: Nov 27, 2008

Kafka Esq. posted:

Team Theology, what do you think about this, and how does supporting the Conservatives mesh with a presumptive support for science? I assume since you work on the hill, this has been shared with you at least once.

http://scienceblogs.com/confessions/2013/05/20/the-canadian-war-on-science-a-long-unexaggerated-devastating-chronological-indictment/ (has links to all the different stories)

Apologies in advance I am doing this quickly as I have to run soon.

Yea I have read it all, I'm not super thrilled about it but generally cuts to research based science have been contrarily positioned against more practical scientific finding usually related to economic drivers like the oil (evil, depending on your view) sands etc. without going into it to much because it isn't a defensible position unless you believe in an economy at all costs approach (which I often embrace, so guilty) that's what the governments position has largely been.

The government invests in practical and revenue generating science now primarily and two, there what's been a huge push by the government to encourage public private partnerships to create a sustainable scientific community that is not primary reliant on government funds.

Again I'm not here to argue this one, this is just the gvmt position. It also has worked in some cases from what I've seen.

Here is one with Merck.

Another interesting read which laments the drop in private funding and Canada's inability to convert scientific findings into practical revenue generators.

An interesting excerpt against what we are doing though (in that we aren't being consistent in funding)...

Increased success in this arena will be directly related to our capacity to first create the nascent technology that will attract the private sector � dependent on federal support in the provision of predictable and sustainable levels of funding for discovery research - and the creation of a national policy regime that attracts and enables public-private partnerships.

So again it's not perfect but the government is trying to create a scientific community that isn't wholly reliant on gvmt funding. Whether this is good or bad of course, is debatable.

Again I can't stress enough that I'm not arguing anything here. Just presenting the governments side.

# ? Jun 10, 2013 23:38

Kafka Esq.: Jan 1, 2005; "If you ever even think about calling me anything but 'The Crab' I will go so fucking crab on your ass you won't even see what crab'd your crab" -The Crab(TM)

Team THEOLOGY posted:

Yea I have read it all, I'm not super thrilled about it but generally cuts to research based science have been contrarily positioned against more practical scientific finding usually related to economic drivers like the oil (evil, depending on your view) sands etc. without going into it to much because it isn't a defensible position unless you believe in an economy at all costs approach (which I often embrace, so guilty) that's what the governments position has largely been.

The government invests in practical and revenue generating science now primarily and two, there what's been a huge push by the government to encourage public private partnerships to create a sustainable scientific community that is not primary reliant on government funds.

...

Increased success in this arena will be directly related to our capacity to first create the nascent technology that will attract the private sector � dependent on federal support in the provision of predictable and sustainable levels of funding for discovery research - and the creation of a national policy regime that attracts and enables public-private partnerships.

So again it's not perfect but the government is trying to create a scientific community that isn't wholly reliant on gvmt funding. Whether this is good or bad of course, is debatable.

Again I can't stress enough that I'm not arguing anything here. Just presenting the governments side.

Except that's not what the government claims it has been doing - it's openly saying it's trying to create a scientific community of "practical revenue generating" technology. I think we can agree that it's counter-productive for government to leave the free market in charge of science. After all, so many technologies that have helped the world, even in our very own country, have been the results of accidental discovery with no practical aims.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 00:06

Throwdini: Aug 2, 2006

Team THEOLOGY posted:

...without going into it to much because it isn't a defensible position unless you believe in an economy at all costs approach (which I often embrace, so guilty) ...

If you know you're guilty of doing something wrong you should stop doing it.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 00:48

Team THEOLOGY: Nov 27, 2008

Throwdini posted:

If you know you're guilty of doing something wrong you should stop doing it.

Me personally, not at all. You have to pick a side, they all do things we do not agree with. It's about best finding the one we think can.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:00

Political Whores: Feb 13, 2012

Private industry will never do the sort of broad primary research and long-term research necessary for subsequent technological advancement. Government should be investing in the research sectors that private industry can't due to initial investment costs and longterm funding commitments, not subsidising industry research.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:00

mik: Oct 16, 2003; oh

Throwdini posted:

If you know you're guilty of doing something wrong you should stop doing it.

I've read a lot of Team Theology's posts and while I appreciate his point of view in the thread, a lot of his posts seem to have the caveat "Yeah what we're doing isn't so great..." or "I can't defend that position...", especially on transparency and corruption as well as science which are really the big contentious issues that people have with the Conservatives. So I'm a bit curious (and I don't mean this rudely) what is, or continues to be, appealing about the Conservatives? Apart from them being your employer in some fashion, I guess. I'm genuinely curious given that a lot of your posts are in fact in agreement with other posters about various topics that are quite critical of the government, not just their recent actions, but their modus operandi in general.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:01

quaint bucket: Nov 29, 2007

Canadian Politics Megathread: Let's Pile On the Lone Conservative

Someone asked him a question and he answered to the best of his ability. It's a fairly reasonable position to take and one I thought was a reason for the Conservative's approach on research for the sake of the economy. I don't necessary agree with it but I get it and it does explain the MR department a little more.

The following response was basically "trap sprung. Let me tell you that YOUR government is doing otherwise :smugdog:

"

There's quite a few good posters (would name them but why start a pissing contest?) here who shine the light on certain elements but the above method I mentioned is just a great way to make sure that conservatives stay Conservatives and fence sitters (like myself!) go Conservative. Ivory tower and all that.

I am poo poo, I know this.

Christ Hadfield retired from being an ASTRONAUT MAN and is pursuing private endeavours outside of the government.

E: posts happened when I was typing. Yay for not refreshing the page

quaint bucket fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Jun 11, 2013

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:09

Team THEOLOGY: Nov 27, 2008

Hey guys its all good. Thanks though for the defence.

mik posted:

I've read a lot of Team Theology's posts and while I appreciate his point of view in the thread, a lot of his posts seem to have the caveat "Yeah what we're doing isn't so great..." or "I can't defend that position...", especially on transparency and corruption as well as science which are really the big contentious issues that people have with the Conservatives. So I'm a bit curious (and I don't mean this rudely) what is, or continues to be, appealing about the Conservatives? Apart from them being your employer in some fashion, I guess. I'm genuinely curious given that a lot of your posts are in fact in agreement with other posters about various topics that are quite critical of the government, not just their recent actions, but their modus operandi in general.

I say I won't defend or it isn't so great because I really don't have the will to argue with an entire forum. I like to toss in an opinion or two where its valid and I am more than happy to debate the merits of specific bills specifically in person but I usually don't have the time to engage in what I consider to be incredibly cyclical and often partisan logic, or illogic, depending on your view.

As for what appeals to me about the conservatives, I suppose their unabashed support for punitive crime, less gun control, better situations for businesses and job providers and a distinct and total commitment to developing the oils sands, the state of Israel, and a somewhat hawkish posturing when dealing with certain countries that less than legit'ly handle certain rights and freedoms but while still maintaining a commitment to free market (save SM that boils the brains). Free trade deals, unilateral and multilateral non-UN driven defence posturing.

Etc.

Also I like private healthcare etc - but I understand its need and support it. Like schools and what have you.

I'm not debating the merits of the way I feel, or why I have my views because I don't ever really care to do that online. Just a general outline of why I tend to lean Conservative over other parties. Though I see the merits of the individual policies of many. Especially in files that certain parties hold dear.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:11

Paper Jam Dipper: Jul 14, 2007; by XyloJW

quaint bucket posted:

Canadian Politics Megathread: Let's Pile On the Lone Conservative

I pointed this out earlier. Dude doesn't have to be the spokesman for the Conservative Party and explain why he hasn't licked the dead taint of Jack Layton before placing stamps on NDP donation letters.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:11

Juul-Whip: Mar 10, 2008

quaint bucket posted:

Canadian Politics Megathread: Let's Pile On the Lone Conservative

Turns out, posting terrible opinions in a debate forum is a great way to get argued with! Shocking, I know

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:24

bunnyofdoom: Mar 29, 2008; THE HATE CRIME DEFENDER HAS LOGGED ON

THC posted:

Turns out, posting terrible opinions in a debate forum is a great way to get argued with! Shocking, I know

But, no-one in this echo chamber thread argues with you?

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:28

Team THEOLOGY: Nov 27, 2008

THC posted:

Turns out, posting terrible opinions in a debate forum is a great way to get argued with! Shocking, I know

But you realize the reason I am not defending them isn't because I don't feel they are indefensible but engaging in partisan debates is something I can do all day.

I offer you the opinion such that you can enjoy the benefit of seeing it from the other side.

That being said lets just get back to politics this isn't an AMA. We are getting off topic.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:31

Juul-Whip: Mar 10, 2008

I enjoy your posts and I understand the desire to avoid intractable derail arguments about Israel or Reaganomics or what have you; what I don't enjoy is the :qq:

ing any time it looks like someone might want to actually Debate and Discuss the things you post

Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Jun 11, 2013

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:33

Alctel: Jan 16, 2004; I love snails

Team THEOLOGY posted:

and a somewhat hawkish posturing when dealing with certain countries that less than legit'ly handle certain rights and freedoms but while still maintaining a commitment to free market

unilateral and multilateral non-UN driven defence posturing.

Not really sure what these two mean

edit:

Team THEOLOGY posted:

But you realize the reason I am not defending them isn't because I don't feel they are indefensible but engaging in partisan debates is something I can do all day.

I offer you the opinion such that you can enjoy the benefit of seeing it from the other side.

That being said lets just get back to politics this isn't an AMA. We are getting off topic.

I think the problem is that a lot of people in here are genuinely interested in what you have to say and would like to debate about it - I mean I absolutely fundamentally disagree with about 80% of the positions you list and really am interested why you hold those positions - you are pretty articulate and could probably do a good job of fighting your corner. I do understand that that could probably horribly spiral out of control away from current events though, so whatever

Alctel fucked around with this message at 01:42 on Jun 11, 2013

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:39

BattleMaster: Aug 14, 2000

Paper Jam Dipper posted:

I pointed this out earlier. Dude doesn't have to be the spokesman for the Conservative Party and explain why he hasn't licked the dead taint of Jack Layton before placing stamps on NDP donation letters.

Well he really isn't, which makes him more interesting to talk with. Since he isn't the "support everything the Conservatives do no matter what" type.

In fact he only supports them on a couple of narrow issues. I personally think it's weird how he is such a staunch supporter (or even a staffer?) when all he really cares about are taxes. Edit: I mean, because he's on record as finding a lot of their policies disagreeable. I could never support anyone if they did all kinds of things I found to be repugnant, even if they were good as far as one or two things I feel strongly about.

BattleMaster fucked around with this message at 01:50 on Jun 11, 2013

# ? Jun 11, 2013 01:45

Team THEOLOGY: Nov 27, 2008

BattleMaster posted:

Well he really isn't, which makes him more interesting to talk with. Since he isn't the "support everything the Conservatives do no matter what" type.

In fact he only supports them on a couple of narrow issues. I personally think it's weird how he is such a staunch supporter (or even a staffer?) when all he really cares about are taxes. Edit: I mean, because he's on record as finding a lot of their policies disagreeable. I could never support anyone if they did all kinds of things I found to be repugnant, even if they were good as far as one or two things I feel strongly about.

Well there are a lot of things I support them on really. I just don't always have the time to argue out my reasoning and therefore don't bother bringing up the disagreeable position.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 02:03

Kafka Esq.: Jan 1, 2005; "If you ever even think about calling me anything but 'The Crab' I will go so fucking crab on your ass you won't even see what crab'd your crab" -The Crab(TM)

Team THEOLOGY posted:

Well there are a lot of things I support them on really. I just don't always have the time to argue out my reasoning and therefore don't bother bringing up the disagreeable position.

I can understand this. Why don't you go back to my post, write out a reasonable response (take your time), and we'll avoid quote mining and dog piling it.

As for the rest of the thread - what the gently caress, I didn't ask him for his papers or something. I pressed him on the incredibly important issue of science and innovation funding, something the Conservatives made a key plank as far back as 2004. Over the past six years they've done basically nothing to improve it and everything to sabotage general discovery. If he wants to take a dodge, he can, but pressing him on it isn't gotcha journalism.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 02:09

quaint bucket: Nov 29, 2007

THC posted:

Turns out, posting terrible opinions in a debate forum is a great way to get argued with! Shocking, I know

Oh I have no issue with the debating/arguing. I just have an issue with the demonizing of a poster ("you hold lovely opinions") because they don't agree with their ideology. My other point was that the ivory tower approach was a great way of doing the opponent's work for them.

Anyway, my part is over since TT said his piece and was upfront about how he wish to devote his time with posting. I kinda like it when people aren't partisan as hell. It make things more interesting!

# ? Jun 11, 2013 02:11

Team THEOLOGY: Nov 27, 2008

Kafka Esq. posted:

I can understand this. Why don't you go back to my post, write out a reasonable response (take your time), and we'll avoid quote mining and dog piling it.

As for the rest of the thread - what the gently caress, I didn't ask him for his papers or something. I pressed him on the incredibly important issue of science and innovation funding, something the Conservatives made a key plank as far back as 2004. Over the past six years they've done basically nothing to improve it and everything to sabotage general discovery. If he wants to take a dodge, he can, but pressing him on it isn't gotcha journalism.

I really don't think I made a point I wanted to argue and I definitely don't have the amount of free time to dig out an argument and it would be debatable at best. I can think of a few examples, oil sands collaborating with scientists to create more efficient and economic ways to withdraw resources is one I'll run with. I'm not really debating the position though you see, I was just trying to show you what it was in the hopes that you might see it from the opposing side.

Anyway back to politics. I'm off for the night. Ill be lurking a bit as I can.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 02:13

Sovy Kurosei: Oct 9, 2012

Alctel posted:

I think the problem is that a lot of people in here are genuinely interested in what you have to say and would like to debate about it

Most of the posters here just want a new punching bag to beat on. There is very little genuine interest and I can understand why Team Theocracy doesn't want to bite at the snide remarks.

edit: Just read your post TT, sorry!

Sovy Kurosei fucked around with this message at 02:25 on Jun 11, 2013

# ? Jun 11, 2013 02:17

Tochiazuma: Feb 16, 2007

Sovy Kurosei posted:

Most of the posters here just want a new punching bag to beat on. There is very little genuine interest and I can understand why Team Theocracy doesn't want to bite at the snide remarks.

Just imagine if he announced he was from the 905, or was in favour of tuition increases

Oh you'd see the shitstorm then son

edit: To actually contribute something here, let me throw this out there: OSSTF (high school public teachers union) has been not-so-quietly warning about the dangers of Tim Hudak and co. being elected and then running roughshod over union rights to the point that they are basically agreeing to back down from fighting the Liberals. I don't know if you could call it full-out support for the Liberal brand, but there is a definite "boogeyman" vibe being created around Hudak.

My take is that Hudak is basically unelectable and that as a union we are trying to build political capital with a party that pretty much just screwed us. Anyone else want to weigh in on how likely it is that Hudak and the Ontario Conservatives win the next election?

Tochiazuma fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Jun 11, 2013

# ? Jun 11, 2013 02:20

namaste friends: Sep 18, 2004; by Smythe

I'm utterly bewildered as to why anyone in Canada would or should give a poo poo about Israel.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 02:27

Kafka Esq.: Jan 1, 2005; "If you ever even think about calling me anything but 'The Crab' I will go so fucking crab on your ass you won't even see what crab'd your crab" -The Crab(TM)

Team THEOLOGY posted:

I really don't think I made a point I wanted to argue and I definitely don't have the amount of free time to dig out an argument and it would be debatable at best. I can think of a few examples, oil sands collaborating with scientists to create more efficient and economic ways to withdraw resources is one I'll run with.

Once again, I understand that you don't want to be drawn into a debate or discussion because it would take up too much of your time, and your purpose here is to show us the other side.

Maybe you could quickly summarize some of the positions you'd take on the stuff we talk about constantly here - unions, the environment, accountability, foreign affairs, debt and deficits, and so on? You can take your time, we'd rather hear a calm and clear voice of conservatism than a frenzied quote war, anyway. That only applies when the voice is actually heard, though - right now you're kind of just sheepishly walking in and out of the room trying not to draw too much attention.

Cultural Imperial posted:

I'm utterly bewildered as to why anyone in Canada would or should give a poo poo about Israel.

Why would you be, really? The same kind of phylopolitical bullshit that goes on in the states works here too. They're like us. The other countries around there (which is code for Arabs) are not.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 02:36

Team THEOLOGY: Nov 27, 2008

Sheepishly walking in and out of what is basically the Opposition Lobby to occasionally offer the alternative side. Yup, sounds about right - I'm not looking to be a Conservative hero.

I'm not here to argue, I never have been just to provide some insight from the Blue team I don't really have any interest in being more on a forum. I mostly just enjoy listening and understanding the other side.

You win bro, if I can't write out a succinct argument I won't post. I really wish I had the time to, I spend most of my days doing it and I don't really mean to repeat my days on the forums. All that said I respect were you're coming from and I'm sorry.

Team THEOLOGY fucked around with this message at 03:38 on Jun 11, 2013

# ? Jun 11, 2013 03:35

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

mik posted:

I've read a lot of Team Theology's posts and while I appreciate his point of view in the thread, a lot of his posts seem to have the caveat "Yeah what we're doing isn't so great..." or "I can't defend that position...", especially on transparency and corruption as well as science which are really the big contentious issues that people have with the Conservatives. So I'm a bit curious (and I don't mean this rudely) what is, or continues to be, appealing about the Conservatives? Apart from them being your employer in some fashion, I guess. I'm genuinely curious given that a lot of your posts are in fact in agreement with other posters about various topics that are quite critical of the government, not just their recent actions, but their modus operandi in general.

That sort of caveat isn't Team Theology's alone. Supporters or even people who work for the Liberals and the NDP have disagreed with their parties' policies or decisions, and yet continue to support or work for that party. Most of us (I think) don't agree entirely with any one political party, which means you either throw your hands up in the air and say "gently caress politics!" or you make the best of an imperfect political world.

edit: at the same time I get why people want to argue, since the only thing we have to argue with are talking points from the news.

Dreylad fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Jun 11, 2013

# ? Jun 11, 2013 03:40

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 04:16

vyelkin: Jan 2, 2011

Tochiazuma posted:

My take is that Hudak is basically unelectable and that as a union we are trying to build political capital with a party that pretty much just screwed us. Anyone else want to weigh in on how likely it is that Hudak and the Ontario Conservatives win the next election?

Hudak is pretty shockingly unelectable, and the longer the Ontario Cons stick with him the better from a progressive standpoint. He's now moved on from 'play along but say as many blatantly Harris-ish things as possible' to 'being obstructionist works for the GOP, it'll work for me! :downs:

' and is literally just going to ~~repeal Obamacare 37 times~~ call 37 votes of confidence until finally an election happens, rather than actually try and behave like an adult or a Westminster politician. This is great news because a) it forces Wynne to give the NDP a lot of what they wan in order to stay in power--just look at the last budget, which many NDP supporters were happy enough with that polls (haha Canadian polls, though) showed if Horwath had rejected it they would have voted for Wynne instead in the resulting election because it would have been an incredibly unreasonably move; and b) it makes Hudak more unpopular as time goes on and a lot of centrists see him playing the crazy obstructionist Republican role, which I'd hazard a guess and say the majority of Canadians seeing American politics from the outside are bewildered by.

In the meantime, he can't shut up about recycled GOP talking point, privatizing the LCBO, and other things a majority of Ontarians don't want.

# ? Jun 11, 2013 03:42

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Canadian Politics Megathread: That is simply not Trudeau

«‹›675 »