|
Apropos of nothing but Helsing you write really well and have a great grasp of the issues. You'd make a good columnist.
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:54 |
|
|
The Butcher posted:Apropos of nothing but Helsing you write really well and have a great grasp of the issues. No, that'd make him a terrible columnist.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:What do you think were the main causes of this? I think it has the most to do with this:  The Liberals absolutely swept Toronto, they completely wiped out the NDP in every single riding. Of course there are local factors that Helsing mentioned, like Chow never actually being a particularly inspiring campaigner and the redistricting shifting the riding boundaries, and Vaughan being a pretty popular politician in the area dating back to his time as a much-liked city councillor for the area, but the crux of the matter is that Trudeau's national campaign crushed Mulcair's and Toronto was no exception.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
quote:There's a difference between literally surgery only on your eye (often covered) and regular eye checkups and glasses/contact lenses (not covered except in certain specific circumstances). Funnily enough afaik the same doesn't apply to dental procedures, dental surgery is almost never covered. Wanted to chime in cause I'm the friend Brannock mentioned. I have progressive degenerative vision in my right eye due to Keratoconus, and the only publicly covered treatment is a corneal transplant, which is only done after the cornea is split and needs replacement. In the meantime I have greatly diminished driving ability and I can no longer read out of my bad eye anymore. The treatment I could get today (crosslinking and laser correction) is not covered under OHIP, which is balls. As my understanding, vision becomes covered by OHIP when it falls into a trauma category (Ahh! I'm blind!) rather than preventative (Wow, I'm going blind REALLY fast). It's still tax deductible though, which takes a little bit of the bite out. And yeah, it's a super aggressive version of it. I am literally losing vision by the day. It sucks dick.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Amgard posted:As my understanding, vision becomes covered by OHIP when it falls into a trauma category (Ahh! I'm blind!) rather than preventative (Wow, I'm going blind REALLY fast). That's outrageous.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Amgard posted:Wanted to chime in cause I'm the friend Brannock mentioned. I have progressive degenerative vision in my right eye due to Keratoconus, and the only publicly covered treatment is a corneal transplant, which is only done after the cornea is split and needs replacement. In the meantime I have greatly diminished driving ability and I can no longer read out of my bad eye anymore. The treatment I could get today (crosslinking and laser correction) is not covered under OHIP, which is balls. Tell them you identify as a person with binocular vision and they'll help you out. Are you getting the surgery regardless? How much is it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:That's outrageous. It's also very myopic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:For whatever reason it's very uncommon for Canadian politicians to migrate from provincial to federal politics. You see them move down from federal to provincial fairly regularly (usually, I would imagine, after realizing they'll never get a shot at the top job but they could still be a premier or provincial cabinet minister) but it's very rare for premiers or provincial party leaders, even successful and popular ones, to try and move up. We're very unlike the US in that regard, where it seems like half the country's governors only see their role as a temporary one until they can run for president. The only one that could shift is maybe Wynn despite Ikantski hatred of her most credit her for destroying Harper in Ontario. There was a ton about it in Wells long-form election wrapup.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Ikantski posted:Tell them you identify as a person with binocular vision and they'll help you out. Are you getting the surgery regardless? How much is it? As cyclops-gender, this is problematic to me because- And yeah, I'm gonna get the surgery regardless. I have a wedding to pay for first, though. Then I can see (hah) how I can shore up the 5.4k needed to see properly again. quote:It's also very myopic. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
Amgard posted:I have a wedding to pay for first, though. I don't mean to be insensitive, but are you quite sure you have your priorities in the right order? On another subject: as a result of this discussion, I decided to look into dental/vision insurance. Holy gently caress, what a ripoff that is. There's an absurdly low annual payout limit for dental care, and they only cover 75% anyway, so the best case scenario is I don't lose any money compared to just paying dental visits in cash. Is their target market "people who can't do math?" I'd come out ahead just depositing my premium into a savings account.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I don't mean to be insensitive, but are you quite sure you have your priorities in the right order? Doesn't Alberta have basically 3D6+X as their price guide? Insurance is meant to cover you when bad things happen as well, you would be wise to have some lest you become a debt slave (to a non mortgage lender) ed: wait aren't you in tech? How are you a professional without benefits?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
jm20 posted:Doesn't Alberta have basically 3D6+X as their price guide? Insurance is meant to cover you when bad things happen as well, you would be wise to have some lest you become a debt slave (to a non mortgage lender) afaik he's a self-employed tech contractor, so he doesn't get benefits unless he buys them himself. But yeah for 99.9% of Canadians you either don't have dental/vision benefits or your employer provides them. I don't think I know anybody who actually buys dental insurance on their own.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
jm20 posted:ed: wait aren't you in tech? How are you a professional without benefits? Because Alberta is a lovely place. I don't think PT6A is technically a professional in the sense that he belongs to one of the independent professional societies, but I know loads of Engineers who are self-incorporated "independent contractors", and then employed by a single company. That way the employee is on the hook for figuring out their benefit packages. Of course there's lots of case law that says that those people aren't really independent contractors, they're employees and should be treated as such, but I don't think there's any labour body to enforce those rules. vyelkin posted:But yeah for 99.9% of Canadians you either don't have dental/vision benefits or your employer provides them. I don't think I know anybody who actually buys dental insurance on their own. People do, sort of. Said "independent contractors" have their personal corporations buy vision/dental insurance, and then provide it as a benefit to the only employee (themselves) and any dependants. It's stupid as hell, and the oil industry is rife with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:02
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
jm20 posted:Doesn't Alberta have basically 3D6+X as their price guide? Insurance is meant to cover you when bad things happen as well, you would be wise to have some lest you become a debt slave (to a non mortgage lender) If the dental benefits are capped at something like $600/year, which is what the policy said, I submit to you that it wouldn't cover a dental emergency very well at all. I pay $380/visit twice-yearly for my regular dental checkups and cleaning, so given 75% coverage, I'd still be right up against the payout limit without anything happening. Besides, I have plenty of money to pay for more spendy dental work, it just means I'd have less money to do other things with and/or invest. And, yeah, I'm self-employed. Maybe I can get a policy that's not poo poo if I buy it through my corporation and then offer it to myself, but I'm guessing they'd see through such a cheap trick. EDIT: I mean, I understand that insurance has to make money and therefore my plan premiums ought to cost more than cleanings alone, but I expect a higher payout cap so there's actually some benefit to buying it. PT6A fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Nov 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
I'm really curious as to why you put marriage above not going blind. It must be true love.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-foreign-affairs-art-queen-1.3310633quote:The Queen Elizabeth portrait is out and twin paintings by Quebec modern master Alfred Pellan are back in. quote:The paintings were originally commissioned for the first Canadian mission in Brazil for its opening in 1944, and were painted just after Pellan had returned from Paris and the Second World War, Babcock said. They were originally placed above the reception desk when Queen Elizabeth officially opened the building in 1973.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I don't mean to be insensitive, but are you quite sure you have your priorities in the right order? No need to be worried about insensitivity, I've heard that argument. But it's a hell of a lot more difficult to delay a wedding I've paid well over half into than it is to defer a crosslinking treatment. The thing is with keratoconus is it's an unevenly progressing disorder so I have just as much urgency to get it done now as I do months from now. The plan is to have it done in the new year (and despite what friends or family are saying, I can certainly wait out that long). I appreciate the thought though. Plus right now I can't take off the week needed to recover from having my eyes bombarded with radiation and riboflavin. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
--
Melian Dialogue fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Feb 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
Melian Dialogue posted:I wouldn't really consider a portrait of the Queen to be really Harper's legacy. Unless you really think the Conservatives traditional throwbacks are somehow nefarious in nature, which I don't think you do. seriously, at least go for a good portrait.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
Melian Dialogue posted:I like portraits of the Queen, but more like 1930s portraits of a young Elizabeth because Im a giant hipster who thinks old things are cool not because I want to go back to being a British subject who hates brown people or something. Also, Liz was totally hot when she was younger (but let's say portraits post-WW2, since she was born in 1926).
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
--
Melian Dialogue fucked around with this message at 05:19 on Feb 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Melian Dialogue posted:I wouldn't really consider a portrait of the Queen to be really Harper's legacy. Unless you really think the Conservatives traditional throwbacks are somehow nefarious in nature, which I don't think you do. Having a bunch of paintings of Dear Leader hanging everywhere is grotesque. Actual art should replace this Big Sister Is Watching poo poo at every opportunity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
--
Melian Dialogue fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Feb 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
So apparently BC stopped tracking the number of people turned away from homeless shelters this year. Accurate metrics for homelessness are notoriously hard to develop. This is an actually useful way to track how well we're doing on emergency housing, plus it's an easy measurement. What the hell.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
The ostrich approach to problems
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
What kind of plan only has $600 in dental coverage? What would the premium be? Frankly I'm so thankful for my employer health plan. The dental part is a max of 5000 for a rolling three year period for a single person and 10,000 for a family if I recall. I do wonder what the whole premium is though. My employer pays for the entire thing, including the employee part of the contribution, and it goes on my pay stub as about $600 a year. I wonder if that's the whole thing or only a proportion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
Melian Dialogue posted:Paging CI to come and call me a raging jackboot authoritarian but I like having national symbols of unity that represents something more than just the Government of the day. Even if it happens to be some old lady in another country. It's not like they decided to hang pictures of JT in its place, though. I don't really give a poo poo if Queenie is up there one way or the other.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
PT6A posted:If the dental benefits are capped at something like $600/year, which is what the policy said, I submit to you that it wouldn't cover a dental emergency very well at all. I pay $380/visit twice-yearly for my regular dental checkups and cleaning, so given 75% coverage, I'd still be right up against the payout limit without anything happening. Besides, I have plenty of money to pay for more spendy dental work, it just means I'd have less money to do other things with and/or invest. If you work through one of the big agencies they should offer a group rate for benefits. Alberta has the highest dental rates in the country also, so shop around. JawKnee posted:The ostrich approach to problems The Harper approach you mean
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Gorau posted:What kind of plan only has $600 in dental coverage? What would the premium be? Frankly I'm so thankful for my employer health plan. The dental part is a max of 5000 for a rolling three year period for a single person and 10,000 for a family if I recall. I do wonder what the whole premium is though. My employer pays for the entire thing, including the employee part of the contribution, and it goes on my pay stub as about $600 a year. I wonder if that's the whole thing or only a proportion. The premium was going to be something like $70/month. Total bullshit. I'm going to see if another insurer offers high-deductible coverage for the really expensive poo poo, since that's really the only thing I want covered.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
Eej posted:Wow I just realized that Olivia Chow resigned from her MP spot in her failed bid for mayor of Toronto and then didn't get re-elected in the federal election. Maybe Ryerson will take her back even though she flaked out on them 3 months into her job to run for MP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
jm20 posted:If you work through one of the big agencies they should offer a group rate for benefits. I don't. 100% independant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
Haha, the minister responsible for housing is the LNG minister. Leading to this hilarious ministry webpage: http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/organizational-structure/ministries-organizations/ministries/natural-gas-development "Ministry of Natural Gas Development & Responsible for Housing" Oh BC Liberals  Edit: Since I'm making fun of BC ministries, I guess I should point out to non-BC people that we seriously have a full on ministry called "The Ministry of Small Business, Red Tape Reduction" T.C. fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Nov 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
(Thank you for the nice comments upthread, you're too kind) Have a story about two people who should have died. If I didn't know better I'd say the quotes from the doofus quoted here, like, were, like, from, like, an onion story or whatever. quote:BANFF, Alta. — A couple of young tourists from Ontario managed to get away safely after doing nearly everything wrong in their encounter with a grizzly bear in Banff National Park.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
With Harper no longer in power and Nickelback unable to do this anymore... What Canadian band can we expect to endorse Trudeau in such a way? Hedley?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
.
James Baud fucked around with this message at 13:14 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
James Baud posted:Just look into health spending accounts and fund one via your corporation, assuming that you are actually incorporated. Will do. I am most definitely incorporated (you'd have to be crazy not to incorporate, IMO). Thanks for the heads up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Melian Dialogue posted:Paging CI to come and call me a raging jackboot authoritarian but I like having national symbols of unity that represents something more than just the Government of the day. Even if it happens to be some old lady in another country. Art from prominent Canadians, painted in the 1940s, is pretty much the closest to a national symbol of unity you're going to find. Stuff by Canadians about Canada is worth a hell of a lot more than another generic portrait of a lady who has nothing to do with this country aside from some pieces of paper nobody with a brain gives a poo poo about.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Because Alberta is a lovely place. I don't think PT6A is technically a professional in the sense that he belongs to one of the independent professional societies, but I know loads of Engineers who are self-incorporated "independent contractors", and then employed by a single company. That way the employee is on the hook for figuring out their benefit packages. Of course there's lots of case law that says that those people aren't really independent contractors, they're employees and should be treated as such, but I don't think there's any labour body to enforce those rules. federal government has been cracking down on that for a number of years now some people I know through work got told they owed tens of thousands in back taxes now as the government said if the only reason you're not an employee is because you have a shell company to go through we're considering you a personal services business for the past X years, re-evaluate your taxes, and also become an employee of the company. Also, companies would force new hires to do this route so they wouldn't have to pay benefits, CPP, and depending on the contract overtime/holiday pay etc so i do have some sympathy for certain people
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
Yeah, with the amount of people I know who are either passionately anti-monarchist or just don't give a poo poo about the royal family or its links to Canada in any way I would not say a picture of the queen is a symbol of national unity. I think most Canadians just don't care one way or the other and if and she was taken off our coins people would barely notice. I doubt the english royal family is very popular in Quebec either. I don't really give a poo poo, she just seems like some foreign relic. I don't really emotionally associate her with Canada or "unity" in any way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:54 |
|
|
I'll mention as well that Helsing has really been on point lately. If you want to do something more structured like a weekly piece (I hesitate to suggest a blog) or something that could be searched by archive I'd read it. You post good stuff outside this thread too, even in that stupid political fantasies thread you gave the most thoughtful response. Keep it up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2015 22:19
|
|
