|
infernal machines posted:Both. Also martini is code for 3oz of gin with a lemon twist, in a glass that was once in sight of some vermouth. Really? All the "martinis" I've seen lately are just mixed vodka drinks served in a cocktail glass. Not martinis at all. Not even with vermouth to make at least something resembling a vodka martini.
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:15 |
|
|
JawKnee posted:There are the articles that THC linked to, did you read them? Most of them are slippery slope arguments, bringing up that Friedman was in favour of a UBI as an excuse to dismantle social programs in the US. The counterargument to that is... don't dismantle social programs. A fair chunk of them criticized the Finnish experiment, and rightly so because while it seems to have some good aspects (no means testing beyond initial eligibility, non-taxable), 560 euros/month is not even 20% of the median wage for a full-time worker and well below any reasonable definition of a poverty line. The socialist argument that it would depress wages was plausible but lacking much evidence. It also seems inconsistent with the hypothesis that a proper basic income would disincentivize work. Maintaining or improving labour standards and/or increasing the minimum wage would seem to solve this problem anyway. While I am highly skeptical of anything the Ontario Liberals do, the basic income pilot seems fairly reasonable. The terms are: quote:Following a tax credit model, the Ontario Basic Income Pilot will ensure that participants receive: Could it be more generous? Yes, and it should be. Horwath's only major comment on it so far has been that it should be pegged at 100% of the Low Income Measure instead of 75%, which is sensible. But so far it doesn't seem to be paired with any proposals for major cuts to other benefits - to the contrary, the Liberals have also promised free prescription drugs for anyone under 25. The recommendation is that it replace Ontario Works and the Disability Support Program, two programs I know nothing about, but without reducing net benefits for anyone. Of course the Liberals haven't promised to actually do anything about mincome until the pilot is complete in 2020, but I see no compelling reason to oppose it.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
It's really weird for this thread to have TWO spirits of spitefulness now. Makes it almost crowded!
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
patonthebach posted:There's basically no way there is enough tax to support it in a country like Canada. Let's say you need to hand out 30k a year to each person so they can afford to live. That's more than the entire tax revenue in from citizens. What?! $30000/year is way more than you need for a basic income per person. That's practically the median individual income! I live in midtown Toronto with my wife and 3 kids, renting a 2-br apartment in quite a good neighbourhood, with a 7-minute walk to the subway station. Our family's total expenses for last year were around $40,000. So on $20,000 per person, we can live comfortably in the country's second most expensive city. We are fairly frugal people and have cheap habits (no smoking, virtually no alcohol), we don't eat out much, and we have cheap hobbies like reading and gaming and posting on the internet, but that's sort of the point of a basic income - it's not supposed to cover luxuries. And honestly, if I wasn't working a job (2 jobs) in downtown Toronto, we could easily move to a cheaper place (i.e. outside of Toronto) and cut another $8000 or more per year off of our budget. So if I'm trying to decide what is an appropriate UBI, I'd say $16,000/adult would be pretty generous. If you're married or if you are willing to live with a roommate, a combined income of $32,000 for two adults should cover all the basics - housing, food, transportation, utilities and internet. If you want to live in a more expensive location like a big city, or have expensive hobbies and habits, or buy a house instead of renting, then you will need to get at least a part-time job or something. That doesn't seem unreasonable. As for how affordable this would be, back-of-the-napkin math shows me that if we replaced the current income tax regime with a flat tax on all earned income (employment, cap gains, everything), then that flat tax rate would need to be around 45% to afford $16,000 per adult and replace our current personal income tax. Note that the existence of a UBI makes a flat tax progressive, as people with lower amounts of earned income would end up with a very low or even negative effective tax rate - which is not to say that we couldn't still have progressive tax brackets - I just went with the flat version to make the numbers easier to calculate without making a whole drat spreadsheet. Under those assumptions, roughly $60000 is the cutoff for who would benefit and who would lose from this policy - anyone with a personal income of $60,000 or more would end up with less after-tax income than they do now, while anyone below that would be better off. This means that about 2/3rds of people would be better off with the UBI and the richest 1/3rd (aka "the middle class" according to Liberals) would be worse off. Also I didn't take into account the cuts you might make to things like welfare and EI, so that 45% could come down a handful of %s depending on what exactly is cut. Editing again to say that a UBI with a 50% phase-out like the Liberals are piloting could potentially be a disincentive to work, as your first $32000 earned would be taxed at a vastly higher rate than all your income over that amount. A phase-out is stupid, as it is exactly equivalent to a very regressive tax with the lowest tax bracket seeing by far the highest tax rate. Jimbozig fucked around with this message at 04:56 on May 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
THC posted:Yeah I fixed that lovely inaccurate meme He original looks pretty accurate to me.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
Just want to make sure you all know that people can use drugs and not be addicts right?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 05:27
|
|
|
Normy posted:Just want to make sure you all know that people can use drugs and not be addicts right? Look they saw a news story once that said just once was enough to get hooked and ruin your life. Im pretty sure that elevates them past armchair doctors.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
Normy posted:Just want to make sure you all know that people can use drugs and not be addicts right? Why would that distinction matter?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 06:18
|
|
|
I know plenty of people who survive and even have a good time on 10-15k a year. They tree plant, they do weird gray market jobs, they trade favours for beers, and they live on more remote islands or tiny rural towns. Some sort of low guaranteed income would see a huge exodus from the cities to where ever life is cheapest. It would be a hell of an experiment and I'd love to have a magic simulator that would show what such a national program would do over say a decade or two.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 07:11
|
|
|
so, assuming a plan like the Ontario plan, the government would be providing some amount of money to anyone earning below 30k/year? Without knowing how many people that is it's hard to say anything, but based on these old stats - we're looking conservatively at around 12 million people drawing some amount. That's a fuckload of money.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 08:23
|
|
|
.
James Baud fucked around with this message at 12:48 on Aug 26, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 08:38
|
|
|
Normy posted:Just want to make sure you all know that people can use drugs and not be addicts right? There is such a thing as potential for addiction. While the detailed mechanisms differ from one drug to another. Opioid tolerance and dependence are fairly well understood even if not all details are fully elucidated. In simple terms: there are several types of receptors that can be activated by opioid drugs, each having a particular distribution throughout the body with different physiological roles. Different opioids have different affinities for each receptor as well as different effects (e.g. strength of receptor activation). That being said, prolonged/repeated stimulation of certain receptors (mu opioid receptors are prone to this) will result over time to the development of a tolerance, meaning that increasingly higher doses are needed to achieve the same effect. As tolerance grows, the body becomes dependent on opioid stimulation otherwise a number of physical symptoms start to manifest. This is physical dependence. It will happen with pretty much all sustained or sufficiently frequent opioid use at varying rate in different people. Note: we now differentiate between physical dependence and the psychological manifestation of dependence (addiction) although the terms have been used interchangeably. Psychological dependence is involves dopamine rewards mechanisms which are similar for many types of addiction or impulse control disorders. Not all drugs have the same dependence/addiction potential. Not every patient is susceptible the same way to dependence/addiction.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 12:18
|
|
|
I'm your class of 'apart from pain relief, opiods don't affect me *too* much' - having had narcotics for a couple of surgeries (including having my jaws cut off and reattached), I've had Percocet, liquid codeine phosphate, morphine, Oxycodone, Demerol, more or less refill on request for weeks. I learned a lot about pain management - taking a combo of anti-inflammatory, analgesic and narcotics over several weeks taught me that when in pain, keep taking your drugs - don't be a hero. But when the pain has faded, days or weeks later, that's when you need to stop the narcotics. Holy God, Demerol was a 'Happy Sunday Afternoon Pill'... I found that while I was on it I felt relaxed and productive. At the end I took my last 3 pills back to Shoppers and told them I felt I didn't need them for pain any more. I can still feel a faint longing for the chill I felt after popping one, even when I was back working and busy as hell I felt... good... on Demerol. What drove me to stop was the image of my mother, who was given a Valium prescription after my Dad died in 1968. My Godfather made it infinite refills and told her if she was really sad, a slug of scotch would also help. Pictures of my now pill-addicted alcoholic mother turning into a concentration-camp victim until she went cold turkey years later still haunt me. She remained a quiet alcoholic and smoker the rest of her life. That made me aware there was a really bad place possibly waiting for me if I listened to the longing for more Happy Sundays. But I still miss it a tiny bit. Tl;Dr - take your meds til you don't need them; then stop.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
That was a very good post, thank you. Im sorry for your loss.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 14:45
|
|
|
It's no use to tell the chronic pain sufferers to stop though; a friend's mom has been on fentanyl for chronic pain for years now. She's basically become immobile and rarely goes out; and now her husband has Alzheimer's.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
JawKnee posted:Wait, aren't you the same shithead that can't handle taking the bus because other people might be too loud for your delicate ears? I don't have platinum, so I don't know specifically what post you're talking about, but being a loud jackass on the bus isn't and never was a human right. And the TTC agrees.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 15:57
|
|
|
Lol calgary airport has in addition to moving sidewalks little electric shuttles to drive all the obese people around the airport.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Lol calgary airport has in addition to moving sidewalks little electric shuttles to drive all the obese people around the airport. Every airport has that, though? Lots of airports even have trains.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Lol calgary airport has in addition to moving sidewalks little electric shuttles to drive all the obese people around the airport. That's because connecting flights come in from terminal A and leave in terminal E 10 minutes apart and the building is 2km long. I remember Westjet complaining that they had to double their staff to they could service each wing individually because of how long it takes to get end to end.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Every airport has that, though? Lots of airports even have trains. Yeah but like half the hallway is a dedicated shuttle lane and they have permanent circulating shuttles that seat ten for free use by everyone and not just olds. Most airports it's an accessibility service by request and there aren't many. I walked past like fifty of them parked in a station area. I walked to my gate across the airport and I think I beat the shuttle things by a lot. It just seems dumb when they have the moving sidewalks anyways. It's like they started with a plan for a train and then they cost cut their way down to that abomination. Now walking through that airport is as pedestrian unfriendly as the highway. cowofwar fucked around with this message at 18:00 on May 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
BCNDP has requested recounts in Coquitlam - Burke Mountain, Richmond - Queensborough, and Vancouver - False Creek. The BCLibs have requested recounts in Courteney - Comox, and Maple Ridge - Mission. Also apparently there are 176k absentee ballots that may be considered  things could certainly change
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Dedicated lane for shuttles in an airport to facilitate quick connections? When will this war on pedestrians end!?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
JawKnee posted:BCNDP has requested recounts in Coquitlam - Burke Mountain, Richmond - Queensborough, and Vancouver - False Creek. The BCLibs have requested recounts in Courteney - Comox, and Maple Ridge - Mission. Also apparently there are 176k absentee ballots that may be considered Yeah there's not much point in speculating about it until after the recounts and absentees.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
The absentee ballots will be a random smattering of votes for all ridings, yeah?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
THC posted:Yeah there's not much point in speculating about it until after the recounts and absentees. Speculating is literally half of politics
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
ante posted:The absentee ballots will be a random smattering of votes for all ridings, yeah?  who knows. Assuming an equal distribution it's slightly over an extra 2k votes per riding. But I don't think that's how it will be distributed. Any vote that was either mailed in, or simply cast outside of the voter's riding is considered an absentee vote - so maybe a lot of rural riding voters were in the urban centers at the time, or maybe a lot of urban voters were out in rural ridings for work - going to be interesting to see how it plays out.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
Well, there's a military base in Comox, I think the the Liberals are banking on absentee ballots there to put them ahead. I think the Liberal candidate's from the base, too.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 23:44
|
|
|
yep, former base leader or w/e it's called
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 00:52
|
|
|
It may not be CanPol News, but on Big Brother Canada the Baby Boomer Real Estate Agent just voted her closest ally out in order to ensure that someone she has an irrational hatred towards doesn't win, which also makes her chances of winning drop to 0%
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 02:14
|
|
|
a) there's a Big Brother Canada? b) people would waste time watching it?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
JawKnee posted:a) there's a Big Brother Canada? You wouldn't believe
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 03:16
|
|
|
That is so dumb. *goes back to watching quake champions beta streams*
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 05:36
|
|
|
JawKnee posted:a) there's a Big Brother Canada? It's good in a terrible way, especially the first season
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 10:48
|
|
|
i dont even own a tv
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 14:43
|
|
|
RBC posted:i dont even own a tv I own one but I don't have an antenna or cable. Aside from streaming a sporting event I haven't even seen any cancon in about five years outside the occasional YouTube video.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 19:22
|
|
|
Just a reminder about the absentee ballots in BC - BC's system is that the ballot needs to be postmarked on/before election day, and then have like 7 days to make it through the postal system before being counted - so the number of ballots (147k) could be even higher. This is opposite other provinces where the ballot needs to arrive at the election office on/before election day (ie: travel time is senders problem). I could see this changing for the next election.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
It's not like we've never had an election before and absentee votes are some giant mystery that we have to blindly guess about... Only a small number of absentee votes are mail in. Last election was under 7000 for the province. Maybe we have more, but the votes trickling in this week would have been in the thousands at worst. Also, the whole 'Comox has a military base' thing doesn't seem to make a difference. Absentee ballots there have swung NDP twice, and Liberal once over the past three elections. So there is no obviously apparant lean towards the Liberals.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
T.C. posted:It's not like we've never had an election before and absentee votes are some giant mystery that we have to blindly guess about... Well, I hope not. But they seem to have gone pretty hard after votes there this time, and when you have that many people with PTSD trying to make a difficult choice who knows what's going to happen.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
MikeSevigny posted:Well, I hope not. But they seem to have gone pretty hard after votes there this time, and when you have that many people with PTSD trying to make a difficult choice who knows what's going to happen. MOst of them seem to be posting in here about the BC election results.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 03:15 |
|
|
EvilJoven posted:I own one but I don't have an antenna or cable. Aside from streaming a sporting event I haven't even seen any cancon in about five years outside the occasional YouTube video. Sup enemy of the big 3 telecoms buddy 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2017 22:03
|
|
