|
infernal machines posted:I try not to question professionals in their choice of tools, especially farmers, they are after all, out standing in their field. 
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 19:51 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I really want to see data on the necessity of this though. Attacking herd animals yes. If you raise sheep or cattle that animal is destroying your livelihood. There is compensation from the province for such incidents but it's not always adequate. My grandpa used to take potshots at coyotes to scare them off (especially since it was the middle of the night), but usually it was someone's dog that had gone wild had to be killed. Think I've told the story before, but one of these rogue dogs that tore the throat out of a lamb that he had to shoot ended up belonging to an OPP sergeant who showed up and threatened to throw him in jail.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 01:58
|
|
|
Yeah, you shoot coyote as you come across em cuz they eat your smallish barn yard critters. Coyotes are smart litte bastards. In addition to going wild, farm dogs are also very good at eating neighbour’s cats, dreylad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 02:23
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:I try not to question professionals in their choice of tools, especially farmers, they are after all, out standing in their field.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 02:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/PnPCBC/status/1104151955432185856 I wonder how many jobs justify hounding public servants to suicide
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 03:53
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:https://twitter.com/PnPCBC/status/1104151955432185856 Why is CBC even letting her near a camera? Why is CBC so trash now? e: I really loving hate how JOBS are now used to justify every evil regressive lovely idea to ever fart out of a conservative mouth
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 03:58
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:https://twitter.com/PnPCBC/status/1104151955432185856 Look don't you know the role of the Attorney General is to support our growing economy? I am almost certain that is the exact job description. I haven't looked this up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 03:58
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 04:29
|
|
|
Furnaceface posted:Why is CBC even letting her near a camera? Why is CBC so trash now? Sometimes you just need to give people the rope.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 04:30
|
|
|
Furnaceface posted:Why is CBC even letting her near a camera? Why is CBC so trash now? Has it always been the case that a job is a good thing just by virtue of being a job? Like, if your job is to work for a huge, evil, corrupt company, maybe your job should be gone?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 04:38
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 04:41
|
|
|
xtal posted:Has it always been the case that a job is a good thing just by virtue of being a job? Like, if your job is to work for a huge, evil, corrupt company, maybe your job should be gone? Helsing or vyelkin probably have a way more accurate/concrete time frame but Im old and it feels like something that really picked up at the end of the Reagan/Thatcher era of politics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 04:42
|
|
|
Serial killer released due to the job vacancies he created.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 05:28
|
|
|
xtal posted:Has it always been the case that a job is a good thing just by virtue of being a job? Like, if your job is to work for a huge, evil, corrupt company, maybe your job should be gone? This is definitely the current dogma, but we are seeing some growing pushback against the idea. A video from Davos went viral relatively recently where Winnie Byanyima was responding to some CFO who basically said "blah blah taxes are bad, unemployment is at an all time low, shouldn't we be rewarding job creators?" where she pointed out that basically "low unemployment" is a meaningless statistic if you're fine counting jobs where people are exploited. If people are employed but still below the poverty line then what social good is that employment doing? There is a wider issue with the concept of jobs/unemployment that society is going to have to deal with at some point, which is that often when jobs disappear it's because they aren't needed anymore. Automation exists and it's not going away. We are going to have to learn to accept the idea that maybe we don't need everyone to be working for society to function and that people shouldn't be punished because their skills aren't currently in demand. This is sort of the basic idea behind UBI - that everyone deserves a decent quality of life regardless of whether or not they "contribute", but as has been mentioned a bunch of times in this thread already, UBI is a band-aid solution at best and many of the advocates of it may not actually genuinely care about improving the quality of life of the unemployed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 05:42
|
|
|
Furnaceface posted:Why is CBC even letting her near a camera? Why is CBC so trash now? Never forget that one of the things JWR was told when they were pressuring her was "we can line up op-eds from here to the moon saying you did the right thing". Furnaceface posted:Helsing or vyelkin probably have a way more accurate/concrete time frame but Im old and it feels like something that really picked up at the end of the Reagan/Thatcher era of politics. I've no idea actually. From personal experience I'm young and I don't think I ever remember it being a different way. My hunch would be the same as yours, that it's something that came with neoliberalism and love for "job creators". Certainly the narrative from the wealthy has been that by providing jobs they're immune to all criticism for a lot longer than that, but before the advent of neoliberalism it seems there was a much stronger counter-narrative saying jobs aren't the be-all and end-all and in fact our end goal should be no one having to work at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 05:44
|
|
|
Your worth as an individual is wholly dependent on your employment. Something something Protestant work ethic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 06:08
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Never forget that one of the things JWR was told when they were pressuring her was "we can line up op-eds from here to the moon saying you did the right thing". Adam Smith had that poo poo pegged down in the 1700s. quote:For example, Smith lectured that the cause of increase in national wealth is labour, rather than the nation's quantity of gold or silver, which is the basis for mercantilism, the economic theory that dominated Western European economic policies at the time Jobs are good because they add profit and growth, otherwise the companies wouldn't survive having jobs like that so the default is that all jobs are good because they are good for the national economy. When was the strongest counter narrative saying that our end goal should be no one having to work at all? Genuinely curious
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 06:17
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Again, 75% of gun deaths in Canada are suicides and the vast majority of those are being committed with legally-purchased and legally-owned firearms. Research also shows that reducing the availability of one method of suicide does not result in an increase of corresponding magnitude in suicide by other means. I hate to be a big stickler on this stuff but yes, the overwhelming amount of gun homicides in Canada are gang/drug related. The amount of homicides that are caused by legally owned guns in Canada is something like 10 or less a year. It is not common for a typical gun owner in Canada to shoot their family members. And I am curious which studies you reference that the suicide rate decreases if you remove a common method of suicide. Everything I've seen says theres conflicting evidence if the removal of firearms leads to an increase of attempts of suicide in different methods, negating the savings. I think we would be much better served by providing free counselling and psychiatry which would do worlds more good than banning more guns in Canada when it comes to suicide, but hell, no government anytime soon is going to want to spend the real money it would cost for these programs. vincentpricesboner fucked around with this message at 06:33 on Mar 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 06:30
|
|
|
zapplez posted:And I am curious which studies you reference that the suicide rate decreases if you remove a common method of suicide. Everything I've seen says people just find another way to attempt it. But I am open to better data. It's not firearms, but does this float your boat? It's the study of the suicide rate in Toronto following the installation of the barrier on the Bloor Viaduct, TBF all it shows is that people don't use that method as much. Postess with the Mostest posted:Adam Smith had that poo poo pegged down in the 1700s. Well that's fine and all, but what does the increase in national wealth do for the average individual? The ones who have seen a decreasing rate of return on their labour for the last 50 years? infernal machines fucked around with this message at 06:44 on Mar 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 06:34
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:It's not firearms, but does this float your boat? It's the study of the suicide rate in Toronto following the installation of the barrier on the Bloor Viaduct, TBF all it shows is that people don't use that method as much. From a vox article https://www.vox.com/2016/2/29/11120184/gun-control-study-international-evidence "This helps explain some unusual results. For instance, some data from Quebec found that a Canadian law reducing access to firearms led to an increase in suicides by hanging — a large enough increase to offset the decline in suicides by firearm that followed the law. Other studies, from Australia and New Zealand, found a similar substitution effect." Its hard to find recent suicide studies in Canada, doesn't seem like we have good stats since 2009. Thanks Harper? But yeah, if you limit access to firearms it can help a bit, but the determined ones will just figure out another way. Sorry for arguing about this, but as someone thats done plently of shifts for a suicide hotline, I am kind of a bugaboo on this issue because what we need is way more funding for mental health, banning guns wont solve (or help a ton) just like banning the sale of rope at home hardware won't fix things either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 06:46
|
|
|
zapplez posted:Sorry for arguing about this, but as someone thats done plently of shifts for a suicide hotline, I am kind of a bugaboo on this issue because what we need is way more funding for mental health, banning guns wont solve (or help a ton) just like banning the sale of rope at home hardware won't fix things either. I agree that it's one of those things that probably gets brought up because it sounds good and it makes "gut sense" even if it's not particularly true. It wouldn't hurt anything, but it's also unlikely to address the actual issue.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 06:51
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:I agree that it's one of those things that probably gets brought up because it sounds good and it makes "gut sense" even if it's not particularly true. It wouldn't hurt anything, but it's also unlikely to address the actual issue. Yeah, and its not to say there isn't a bunch of things that could be done with our current gun laws to lower violent gun crime. Having stricter storage laws, longer training courses, longer waiting periods, more RCMP officers that are screening the background checks, more funding for police and courts to remove guns from owners that have committed spousal abuse, etc etc etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 06:59
|
|
|
zapplez posted:And I am curious which studies you reference that the suicide rate decreases if you remove a common method of suicide. Everything I've seen says theres conflicting evidence if the removal of firearms leads to an increase of attempts of suicide in different methods, negating the savings. I'm sorry but what you've seen is wrong according to scientific literature. It's been repeatedly shown by empirical studies that means restriction is an effective way of lowering the suicide rate overall. Here's an article from the Lancet in 2012: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(12)60521-2/fulltext quote:Summary Here's an article from the Journal of Accident Analysis and Prevention from 2005: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001457505000400 quote:Abstract Here's an open-access article from the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health from 2011: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3290984/ quote:Abstract And that's just what popped up on the first page of Google.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 07:07
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Adam Smith had that poo poo pegged down in the 1700s. It was automation. Keynes, for example, in the 30s, thought that over time automation would mean people would be more and more productive for each hour they spent at work, which would lead to reductions in the workweek. He thought by the 21st century we'd all be working 25-30 hour weeks, and those workweeks would continue to shrink as productivity continued to increase through automation. When you look at a job through that lens the individual job suddenly becomes much less important when the end result is going to be fully-automated luxury gay space communism. And for a while it looked like he was right. Automation and increases in productivity led to either decreased workweeks or increased wages (or both) up until the 70s and the advent of neoliberalism, when globalization, the deregulation of capital, and all the other stuff we talk about in here all the time meant productivity became decoupled from wages and labour conditions. Since then real wages have stagnated and workweeks, iirc, have actually gotten longer, even though productivity has continued to increase. The difference is that we've eroded the power of labour so much that we're no longer able to negotiate for higher productivity translating into decreased workweeks or increased wages, so instead all the benefits of that increased productivity have flowed to capital instead of labour. And under those conditions, capital has used its increasing dominance and the increasing insecurity of work to make us all think that they're the ones wonderfully bestowing jobs upon us, instead of the ones exploiting our labour.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 07:15
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:https://twitter.com/PnPCBC/status/1104151955432185856 BC liberals are NOTHING like the federal liberal party. They are fake Liberals, more Conservative than Liberal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 07:23
|
|
|
zapplez posted:I hate to be a big stickler on this stuff but yes, the overwhelming amount of gun homicides in Canada are gang/drug related. The amount of homicides that are caused by legally owned guns in Canada is something like 10 or less a year. It is not common for a typical gun owner in Canada to shoot their family members. Oh and I also have to push back here. Gangs are not insignificant but they're not the overwhelming majority of gun homicides in Canada. Here's a recent Statscan report on homicides in Canada in 2017. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54980-eng.htm In 2017 there were 266 homicides by firearm in Canada, and 137 of those were gang-related. So it's not the overwhelming majority, it's half. When you take the other half and combine it with the overwhelming majority of gun deaths that are suicides, I'm standing by my statement that the vast majority of gun deaths in Canada are people who lose control one day and either kill themselves or someone they know with a legally-owned firearm.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 07:25
|
|
|
zapplez posted:From a vox article also lol that you quoted that one paragraph from the Vox article but left out the next two: quote:This helps explain some unusual results. For instance, some data from Quebec found that a Canadian law reducing access to firearms led to an increase in suicides by hanging — a large enough increase to offset the decline in suicides by firearm that followed the law. Other studies, from Australia and New Zealand, found a similar substitution effect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 07:30
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:It was automation. Keynes, for example, in the 30s, thought that over time automation would mean people would be more and more productive for each hour they spent at work, which would lead to reductions in the workweek. He thought by the 21st century we'd all be working 25-30 hour weeks, and those workweeks would continue to shrink as productivity continued to increase through automation. When you look at a job through that lens the individual job suddenly becomes much less important when the end result is going to be fully-automated luxury gay space communism. I think a big shift is the culture around consumption went crazy. Like we're making so much stuff now that we're throwing most of it away. Productivity went up but we never actually settled on a cap for "how much is enough". So we're just making more, more, more, regardless if anyone actually wants/needs any of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 07:37
|
|
|
THC posted:BC liberals are NOTHING like the federal liberal party. They are fake Liberals, more Conservative than Liberal. their love of snc-lavalin was real though, wasn't Gwyn Morgan an SNC guy?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 09:16
|
|
|
It's hilarious to me how many of our apparently unsolvable problems would be solved by communism, or at least socialist ideas. How much money have they gave SNC-Lavalin to keep 9,000 jobs? They could just employ them themselves! We bought a loving pipeline and not for a second did they try and talk about the money that it could bring in for all of us? Government nationalises costs, privatises profit, and it's a loving disgrace. I'm not saying I'm in favour of increased fossil fuel production or consumption, but it would be nice if we saw a nice return on what all of our money bought. Just a nice dividend to every Canadian. Not to mention if the Government tried to compete with private industry, they could just crush them! It's called the dictatorship of the proletariat because it uses dictatorial powers against capitalism, not because it's a dictatorship where the average person has no say in the government.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 10:23
|
|
|
THC posted:BC liberals are NOTHING like the federal liberal party. They are fake Liberals, more Conservative than Liberal. Except Clark's running defence for them here and one of her former staff now works for the (real?) Liberals and is one of the many schmucks they sent to harass JWR into dropping the prosecution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 13:18
|
|
|
Thc was using the "irony" rhetorical device.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 14:11
|
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:Jobs are good because they add profit and growth, otherwise the companies wouldn't survive having jobs like that so the default is that all jobs are good because they are good for the national economy. When was the strongest counter narrative saying that our end goal should be no one having to work at all? Genuinely curious Karl Marx and the communist revolutions in europe Marx wrote a lot about the necissity for a large mass of "reserve labour" (the unemployed) being in the interest of capitalists so as to drive down wages, and to be available during times of rapid growth when rapid increases in production are necessary. It is in the interests of capitalists to have a large class of the unemployed to draw upon. IMO, the narrative of capitalist "job creators" mostly exists to counter the idea of a universal income, and obfuscate the larger problem of increasing unemployement due to automation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
THC posted:well unfortunately we got a seat there by promising to axe their road tolls and if there's anything they hate more than road tolls it's having to live near, look at, or otherwise be aware of the existence of poor people Ridgers get mad whenever the homeless set up a new camp after the previous one got shut or burnt down, all while refusing to have any adequate services for the poor. But of course that's what will keep happening, because the only way to solve homelessness is with homes
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 16:51
|
|
|
RBC posted:Karl Marx and the communist revolutions in europe That's what I was thinking the strongest peak was, like 1917ish. The whole capitalism thing only works with massive amounts of imaginary wealth being lent that will be paid back in the future mostly way in the future. That depends on economic growth and that growth depends on societies being able to produce more and more each year. Each real job contributes to that growth because the employee should be contributing more to the company that they're being paid. So it makes sense for governments to protect the jobs if there's a bad year or something, try to create new ones via innovation credits and stuff like that. Job creators are growth engines and the employees are the fuel, makes sense for governments to protect and nurture both. It seems fundamentally opposed for the government to run on an idea of "our end goal should be no one having to work at all" and I was just wondering if the sentiment was ever strong enough for that to have had much strength in a modern society.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
People in mid 20th century North America thought the world of the Jetsons would be happening within the lifetimes of their children so the idea that significant reductions in labour were imminent is hardly confined to actually existing socialism. If anything the Bolsheviks really fetishized work and a lot of traditional Marxist scholars fell out of favour with the post 60s left precisely because they were seen as too fixated on labour and economic production and the issues surrounding it and weren't engaged enough with the "post materialist" values of the youth counter culture and student movements.Postess with the Mostest posted:Jobs are good because they add profit and growth, otherwise the companies wouldn't survive having jobs like that so the default is that all jobs are good because they are good for the national economy. Yeah I guess that makes sense if you don't think about it very hard and have never heard about externalities before. Postess with the Mostest posted:That's what I was thinking the strongest peak was, like 1917ish. The word "real" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in this paragraph.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 18:06
|
|
|
Automation was a big point of discussion among social commentators, public intellectuals, even the churches in Canada from at least the 1950s onwards. I remember the United Church of Canada took out some ad space in Maclean's, I think? titled something like "The United Church and the Coming Onrush of Robots" or something pretty strange. It wasn't advertising anything, just telling Canadians that it was something the church was discussing that year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2019 23:32
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/anitavandenbeld/status/1104385381980499969 https://twitter.com/kick1972/status/1104496110062702592
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 00:26
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:https://twitter.com/anitavandenbeld/status/1104385381980499969 How are they so bad at this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 00:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 19:51 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2019 00:32
|
|