|
Helsing posted:It takes a special kind of national insecurity to be offended -- as a Canadian -- when the American President won't unequivocally declare America the greatest country in the world. And it takes a special kind of insanity to think that a diplomatic spat with a tiny and very lovely ally like Israel is some kind of betrayal of the west.
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 02:48 |
|
|
Helsing posted:Every major party has a cowardly position on Israel these days but the conservatives and Republicans take it one step further by elevating any disagreement with a foreign head of state on a different continent into a form of treason against the West. I'm always amused by American conservatives' sheer terror at the awesome might of the United Nations.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
THC posted:Right wingers have taken to calling all news they don't like fake, it's the new (((liberal media))) Actually, there are some pretty good parallels to the Comet Pizza nonsense here after all. Ikantski read something and internally fabricated a wholly unrelated narrative about it, then got mad at the CBC(?) for this imagined offense. infernal machines fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Jan 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:Actually, there are some pretty good parallels to the Comet Pizza nonsense here after all. Ikantski read something and internally fabricated a wholly unrelated narrative about it, then got mad at the CBC(?) for this imagined offense. It's 2017 man. The tweet is the news, I'm going to say the vast majority of people who read the tweet aren't clicking through and reading the whole story so how you word it matters. The article itself was fine. Look at this tweet. You could say he spent it at Aga Khan's private island. Or you could say a muslim billionaire's private island. Or Prince Shah Karim Al Hussaini's island. Or a horse racing magnate's island. And you don't need to specify it was a private island like he's some kind of fancy guy, you could just have said in the bahamas. Evoking the movie Postal. https://twitter.com/CBCAlerts/status/817440783762620417 Postess with the Mostest fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Jan 6, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Yes, I suppose you could blame the CBC social media writer for your wholly unsupported cognitive leaps, but whatever happened to the conservative credo of personal responsibility? You can't stretch clickbait article summaries into propaganda, fake news, or bad journalism, no matter how hard you try, unless your plan is to simply redefine those terms until they fit whatever point you're trying to make.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
I was just in a cab and my driver got racist abuse shouted at him after honking at some pedestrians that were jaywalking against our green light in extremely slippery conditions (when it's arguably much less safe to do so than normal). I can only assume the pedestrians in question were extremely economically anxious; hopefully our lord and saviour Kevin O'Leary can do something about that! Should just hit them next time, IMO...
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I was just in a cab and my driver got racist abuse shouted at him after honking at some pedestrians that were jaywalking against our green light in extremely slippery conditions (when it's arguably much less safe to do so than normal). I can only assume the pedestrians in question were extremely economically anxious; hopefully our lord and saviour Kevin O'Leary can do something about that! otoh, people shouldn't run over pedestrians with their cars
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:00
|
|
|
Booourns posted:otoh, people shouldn't run over pedestrians with their cars On the other hand, people shouldn't cross the street in front of cars when they don't have the legal right to do so. This was not at a crosswalk, this was at a downtown intersection that's completely controlled by timed, not even pedestrian-controlled, traffic lights, and they were crossing on a red. The light had been green for our direction for quite a while, too. When you get told off for doing a stupid and illegal thing, in adverse weather conditions no less, you probably shouldn't tell the driver to "go back to his own country."
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
PT6A posted:On the other hand, people shouldn't cross the street in front of cars when they don't have the legal right to do so. This was not at a crosswalk, this was at a downtown intersection that's completely controlled by timed, not even pedestrian-controlled, traffic lights, and they were crossing on a red. The light had been green for our direction for quite a while, too. When you get told off for doing a stupid and illegal thing, in adverse weather conditions no less, you probably shouldn't tell the driver to "go back to his own country." Sure, but still don't maim people if preventable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
Cerepol posted:Sure, but still don't maim people if preventable. True. Still, I can think of worse things in this world than careless and stupid racists getting hit by cars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
The racist yelling was bad and they should feel bad for yelling racist stuff. At the same time, jaywalking laws are bullshit classist garbage that only exist because of lobbying by automobile manufacturers almost a century ago and is one of the contributors to our cities being loving poo poo holes plagued by overuse of personal motor vehicles. They shouldn't have been written back then and should be abolished now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:The racist yelling was bad and they should feel bad for yelling racist stuff. Classist? And I mean, I have no problem with people jaywalking when it's safe (i.e. not directly in front of cars that have the right-of-way), but it's not unreasonable to give cars the right of way on busy/wide streets, regardless of the poor choices that may have led to that specific traffic pattern.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
quote:A suspect detained following a shooting at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport that killed five people and injured eight was a passenger on a Canadian flight, an official says. How quickly will JT agree to pay for Trump's 40,000 foot high wall?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
Yes. Classist. Jaywalking laws were originally a big gently caress you to anyone who couldn't afford a personal vehicle back when getting around on foot was still a viable way to get around pretty much any town or city on the planet. They made getting around in a personal motor vehicle easier for people could afford them at the expense of people who used their own two feet to get around. And honestly still kinda is, it's just not as apparent because those who can afford cars have now choked the streets with them to the point where those who can't just don't bother venturing on a lot of those streets, including areas where it's so lovely being on foot that people just don't bother at all.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
Consider who are likely going to be targets of jaywalking fines. I agree they are absolutely classist, this is coming from someone without a drivers license and who commutes by bike. But I also agree that pedestrians must take safety into consideration and shouldn't be crossing streets when it is unsafe nor causing unnecessary impediments to traffic flow. As a small aside, I'm not sure why anyone took the comment about hitting them with the car seriously. Seems to me just a venting of frustration at a rude person, not actually advocating a threat to their physical health.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Classist? Yeah. Less so today, but the idea of designating such a large area of public space in urban centres as intended primarily for automobiles was extremely classist back in the day. And continuing to design our cities around extremely inefficient automobile traffic is the majority of the reason why they're so lovely, and so badly run.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:35
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Jaywalking can also be one of those selectively enforced things that can be used to target certain segments of the population disproportionately. Like, hey, there's someone I might want to search their bag or something but have no good reason. Oh look, they jaywalked, now I have a reason to stop them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Xaranthius posted:Consider who are likely going to be targets of jaywalking fines. I agree they are absolutely classist, this is coming from someone without a drivers license and who commutes by bike. But I also agree that pedestrians must take safety into consideration and shouldn't be crossing streets when it is unsafe nor causing unnecessary impediments to traffic flow. Yeah, I actually did misspeak because it's not about cars having the right-of-way, it's about alternating the right-of-way at busy intersections. Pedestrians still have priority over cars going in the direction which has right-of-way. When you have two busy roads that intersect, it's necessary to occasionally stop one direction to allow the other to proceed safely -- cars, cyclists and pedestrians alike. If you have the right of way on your bike, you also shouldn't have to worry about pedestrians violating a traffic signal right in front of you. quote:As a small aside, I'm not sure why anyone took the comment about hitting them with the car seriously. Seems to me just a venting of frustration at a rude person, not actually advocating a threat to their physical health. That's indeed how it was meant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
This classist policy has culminated in massive big box store complexes with literal acres of parking lots and barely any pedestrian, cycling or public transit infrastructure. Back when I was broke as poo poo I almost took a job at a store in one of these places but after looking at the shift and bus schedule meant a lot of time waiting for busses to the point where I would have literally had to sleep in the store overnight when switching from closing shifts to opening shifts because I wouldn't have been able to get home before having to turn around to go back to work. I feel sorry for people who had to take those same jobs because their EI and savings didn't last as long as mine did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
 Cities will never work if cars are banned. How will people get around? I am trying to find an image from The Economist that depicted a typical, modern street as a canyon with no railing on the walkway along it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:42
|
|
|
Xaranthius posted:Jaywalking can also be one of those selectively enforced things that can be used to target certain segments of the population disproportionately. Like, hey, there's someone I might want to search their bag or something but have no good reason. Oh look, they jaywalked, now I have a reason to stop them. Then it's the law enforcement that's a problem, not the law itself. Traffic laws can also be applied selectively, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have those laws at all. EvilJoven posted:This classist policy has culminated in massive big box store complexes with literal acres of parking lots and barely any pedestrian, cycling or public transit infrastructure. Back when I was broke as poo poo I almost took a job at a store in one of these places but after looking at the shift and bus schedule meant a lot of time waiting for busses to the point where I would have literally had to sleep in the store overnight when switching from closing shifts to opening shifts because I wouldn't have been able to get home before having to turn around to go back to work. I feel sorry for people who had to take those same jobs because their EI and savings didn't last as long as mine did. I don't know how you expect any city to work without at least a smattering of busy roads in the core, though (which is where this occurred). This isn't about suburbia, or a place with poor pedestrian infrastructure or no transit -- this was in the downtown core, where there are sidewalks and crosswalks and the light cycles are not incredibly long (so you're never waiting too long to cross). The avenue I was on is heavily used by buses, in fact -- surely expecting them to stop every time a pedestrian wants to cross the street wherever they like downtown is not a practical solution.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
Cars shouldn't be banned in cities, but they should never have the right of way within city limits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
PT6A posted:expecting them to stop every time a pedestrian wants to cross the street wherever they like downtown is not a practical solution Cities and towns existed for hundreds of years like that before jaywalking laws in the 1920s. They managed. Hell, with the abolishment of jaywalking laws maybe people will start walking again and our species will stop getting so loving fat. Also don't use the 'Canada is cold' excuse. I'm still biking to work and it's gone below -30 (real -30 not just windchill) this week. Next time we have a snow storm rather than plodding bike through it which was admittedly slow and sketchy I'm breaking out my snow shoes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:48
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Then it's the law enforcement that's a problem, not the law itself. Traffic laws can also be applied selectively, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have those laws at all. I agree with that, but from a practical standpoint how to do correct the enforcement issue? Is the law necessary or is it a codification of something that is really more common sense and should be dealt with using an education campaign and not law enforcement?
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:Cities and towns existed for hundreds of years like that before jaywalking laws in the 1920s. They managed. Hell, with the abolishment of jaywalking laws maybe people will start walking again and our species will stop getting so loving fat. Hell, why is PT6A taking a cab anyway? He's downtown and can get home via the C-Train. He's probably too good for public transit and will counter this statement by saying it's too inconvenient because his horrible mayor made it that way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:Cities and towns existed for hundreds of years like that before jaywalking laws in the 1920s. They managed. Hell, with the abolishment of jaywalking laws maybe people will start walking again and our species will stop getting so loving fat. I'm 40 years old with three young kids and do not have a drivers license (so obv no vehicle). People think I'm crazy but I can still make do with a bike, my legs and a wagon, occasionally the bus, or getting rides even more rarely. I feel like there's a huge cultural issue around driving and physical exertion that is why our society is getting more and more obese. I may be in Nanaimo where biking year round is easier but I have two brothers in Calgary who have also biked year round as well. We need a major change in attitudes around cars and cycling in order to get our society healthier imo. Cycling is so efficient and provides so much good daily exercise, I advocate it to anyone who will listen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:Cities and towns existed for hundreds of years like that before jaywalking laws in the 1920s. They managed. Hell, with the abolishment of jaywalking laws maybe people will start walking again and our species will stop getting so loving fat. I know. I walk way more often than I drive. When you're biking, do you think that you should have right-of-way over pedestrians in some circumstances? For efficiency's sake, I would think it'd be a good idea. Just because cities are too car-centric right now doesn't mean the ideal alternative is to give pedestrians right of way over everyone all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:56
|
|
|
OSI bean dip posted:Hell, why is PT6A taking a cab anyway? He's downtown and can get home via the C-Train. I was with two other people who wanted to take a cab, and we were going to the same place and had to arrive at the same time. There's no way I'd ordinarily take a cab across downtown, and certainly no way I'd do it if I had to pay for it. Also, in regards to the C-Train, I like that it doesn't have to stop at irregular intervals because, GASP, it has right-of-way over pedestrians. It works a lot better that way imho.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
BTW I don't know if it needs to be said, but I've been a VERY longtime lurker in this thread as well as the Canada Debt Bubble one. I haven't felt much like I could contribute to the conversions so have rarely posted if at all. Guess I feel differently today.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
This year I committed to being more physically active, eating better and relying less on personal vehicle use. I lost 50 pounds in under a year feel like a million bucks and now have both way more patience for pedestrians and cyclists than I used to and way less sympathy for personal motor vehicle users.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:This year I committed to being more physically active, eating better and relying less on personal vehicle use. I lost 50 pounds in under a year feel like a million bucks and now have both way more patience for pedestrians and cyclists than I used to and way less sympathy for personal motor vehicle users. I'm a programmer so my job isn't doing me any favours for my health. My coworkers also think I'm a little crazy because I eat 10 lbs of carrots in two weeks, so often eat 2-3 carrots every day and a large container of plain spinach/greens (no dressing). I feel like our palates, as a society, are too geared to sugar and fat and I've worked hard to try and reduce that for myself and show my kids a good healthy example. I attribute my lifelong cycling and general healthy eating to my coworkers thinking I'm in my late 20s or early 30s instead of my actual age. But I'm the crazy one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 23:03
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I know. I walk way more often than I drive. The only time I feel the slightest bit put off by pedestrians is when the sidewalk is next to the bike path and they choose to walk on the bike path. When that happens I suck it up though because they're on foot and have the right of way and once I go around them I'm back up to speed in two heartbeats. If they ever did implement laws where in some specific circumstances cyclist had the right of way over pedestrians it certainly shouldn't be at the expense of pedestrians in the middle of urban centres.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:The only time I feel the slightest bit put off by pedestrians is when the sidewalk is next to the bike path and they choose to walk on the bike path. When that happens I suck it up though because they're on foot and have the right of way and once I go around them I'm back up to speed in two heartbeats. There are laws right now that give cyclists right of way over pedestrians. If a cyclist has a green light and you, a pedestrian, have a red light or don't-walk signal, you can't just step in front of the cyclist. And it makes perfect sense to have it that way -- it's safest for pedestrians that way, and most efficient for cyclists and other road users.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 23:16
|
|
|
In a lot of places it shouldn't even be that way. There are entire city blocks in some cities marked as commons areas where pedestrians, cyclists and the occasional car mix freely and sort themselves out. It means slowing down but it's better than the entirety of the city being this:
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:In a lot of places it shouldn't even be that way. There are entire city blocks in some cities marked as commons areas where pedestrians, cyclists and the occasional car mix freely and sort themselves out. It means slowing down but it's better than the entirety of the city being this: Yes, that's completely reasonable for some streets, particularly those with a lot of shops and restaurants and stuff like that and I don't like, for example, that the restrictions on traffic on one such street in Calgary have been relaxed. I don't think it's feasible for every single street in a city -- occasionally, there is a benefit from efficient roads that can be used by transit vehicles, commercial vehicles, taxis, etc., even in a pedestrian-centric paradise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:In a lot of places it shouldn't even be that way. There are entire city blocks in some cities marked as commons areas where pedestrians, cyclists and the occasional car mix freely and sort themselves out. It means slowing down but it's better than the entirety of the city being this: This is exactly the image I was looking for.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2017 23:39
|
|
|
That image and this one (or the million variations on it) are like War on Cars 101. I follow a bunch of planners, urbanists, architects, etc. and they come up all the time.  Bonus points if "adding lanes to fight congestion is like loosening your belt to fight obesity" gets quoted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 02:00
|
|
|
Remember when Trudeau promised to increase taxes on executives by taxing stock options as income, then completely broke that promise? Turns out it's because former finance ministers John Manley, who works for a literal CEO rights advocacy group, and former Conservative finance minister, Michael Wilson, both lobbied Bill Morneau not to do it by threatening that executives would cause "uncertainty" in the markets by selling their options. https://www.pressprogress.ca/bay_street_pressured_liberals_to_break_promise_to_close_ceo_tax_loophole_documents_show
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
RBC posted:Remember when Trudeau promised to increase taxes on executives by taxing stock options as income, then completely broke that promise? I'm pretty sure the Canadian tech community has some complicity here as well (they lobbied pretty aggressively and publicly), although in that case it's more collective delusion since their options are largely worthless. Even in America, stock options are taxable as income in the case of RSUs and more-or-less as income in the case of ISOs due to the AMT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 02:48 |
|
|
RBC posted:Remember when Trudeau promised to increase taxes on executives by taxing stock options as income, then completely broke that promise? kill them all, imo
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2017 03:25
|
|