|
PittTheElder posted:There's got to be tons of people who are actively rooting for Climate Change in hopes that it will make Canadian weather less cold. Joke's on them, one possible effect of climate change is that the jet stream slows down (and we're already seeing that the polar vortex migrates south now) which could actually make parts of Canada significantly colder than we're used to.
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 18:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:35 |
|
|
BC wildfire season is already starting in May. This year is shaping up to be another worst forest fire year ever after the last two worst forest fire years ever.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 18:33
|
|
|
mashed_penguin posted:BC wildfire season is already starting in May. This year is shaping up to be another worst forest fire year ever after the last two worst forest fire years ever. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/salal-shrubs-dying-bc-climate-change-1.5127828 https://globalnews.ca/news/5269194/bc-wildfires-early-start/ BC is hosed, the last decade has been so different from when I was a kid, the coastal forests are under immense pressure. The terminally online demented old people say it’s just a natural cycle but bone dry and dying moss in Lower Seymour in March is hosed up.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 19:23
|
|
|
Old people believe in the hundred year cycle so much that the "hundred year floods" that hit two years ago in Ontario is a different hundred year flood that hit this year because it's a new century, so therefore we won't have another flood for a hundred years!
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Old people believe in the hundred year cycle so much that the "hundred year floods" that hit two years ago in Ontario is a different hundred year flood that hit this year because it's a new century, so therefore we won't have another flood for a hundred years! Concepts more complex than licking a poopy finger are impossible to explain to the average person because they have zero understanding of statistics or probabilities so you end up with people thinking earthquakes or floods happen with regular frequency at defined intervals instead of there being a 1/100 chance each year of a flood with a two sigma severity. Good luck explaining a non-linear buffered system with thousands of non-constant variables.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 19:47
|
|
|
 ODDS OF WINNING ARE ONE IN SEVEN AND I BOUGHT EIGHT COFFEES AND DIDNT WIN ANYTHING YOU LIARS
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 19:49
|
|
|
So wait, now we're using math to make fun of the people who think two floods equals climate change and not just some fluke, right? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
I bought this last summer due to the ongoing smoke issues on Vancouver Island. I used it here last week when there was a building burning in downtown Victoria and I was the only person amongst a huge crowd of people using a respirator, including police and some firefighters. I anticipate it won't be long before I'm not the only one wearing a respirator around here during the summers.  cowofwar posted:https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/western-red-cedars-death-dry-climate-change-1.5134262
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
That fire was loving horrible. Smoke for 3 days from it. My office was just the block over and they shut some exterior intakes and kept us all working.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 20:12
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Concepts more complex than licking a poopy finger are impossible to explain to the average person because they have zero understanding of statistics or probabilities
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
James Baud posted:So wait, now we're using math to make fun of the people who think two floods equals climate change and not just some fluke, right? https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/report-findings/extreme-weather
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 20:21
|
|
|
*cracks knuckles*
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 20:32
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:That fire was loving horrible. Smoke for 3 days from it. My office was just the block over and they shut some exterior intakes and kept us all working. Jesus, I'm over by the legislature and there was ash falling and I felt like I'd smoked 2 packs by the end of the first day.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
Xaranthius posted:I bought this last summer due to the ongoing smoke issues on Vancouver Island. I used it here last week when there was a building burning in downtown Victoria and I was the only person amongst a huge crowd of people using a respirator, including police and some firefighters. I'm honestly thinking about picking up a respirator for when the smoke gets bad in Edmonton. I have a carbon filter mask, but I'm worried that it's not going to be enough.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 21:03
|
|
|
berenzen posted:I'm honestly thinking about picking up a respirator for when the smoke gets bad in Edmonton. I have a carbon filter mask, but I'm worried that it's not going to be enough. I got one from last years fires. It was pretty much necessary if I wanted to leave the house. It is worth picking one up.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
goddamn
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2019 23:48
|
|
|
A friend of mine lives in the building in poco that received mass eviction notices which lead to the city passing a no renoviction bylaw. Of course the owners are suing saying it exceeds the city's authority. Its going to be interesting to see how that plays out.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 00:00
|
|
|
Yeah, my mom is on disability and there is straight up nowhere for her to rent in BC, and she can't really leave the lower mainland because she needs medical care. I'll be funneling her money under the table to cover the difference until she dies (more than I have for the past decade, already), pretty much, which will negatively impact my own economic contributions and financial stability. NDP needs to bring down the fuckin' hammer and do something radical like make AirBnB 100% illegal, is what I'm saying. And then we need to start guillotining anyone who complains.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 00:15
|
|
|
James Baud posted:So wait, now we're using math to make fun of the people who think two floods equals climate change and not just some fluke, right? Way to start things off with a bang Rime posted:Yeah, my mom is on disability and there is straight up nowhere for her to rent in BC, and she can't really leave the lower mainland because she needs medical care. I'll be funneling her money under the table to cover the difference until she dies Hello friend. Same spot, but she also just straight up hates living in Toronto and keeps insisting she's going to move to rural Ontario. infernal machines fucked around with this message at 00:26 on May 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 00:22
|
|
|
What's the BCNDP worried will happen if they pass sweeping tenant protections? The landlords that already all donate to the Liberals will continue to vote for the liberals but with more anger when they mark their ballot?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 00:30
|
|
|
I'm likely going to be in the same boat soon. My mom is on disability and currently living in low-income housing in Nanaimo but has been given notice that her building is going to be forcibly vacated at some point in the next 5 years. The non-profit that runs the building didn't provide any sort of contingency plan for the current tenants or direction for how things are going to play out. Perhaps they hope that every resident will vacate the traditional way from the building, aka on a stretcher, and they won't have to worry about helping anyone out. They already got their wish with my dad who also happened to live in the same building, he died last month. He lived across the hall from my uncle (mom's brother). Yes, my mom, dad, and uncle all lived in separate suites in a single low-income housing building and they each got placed there completely independently. I used to joke that my family was going to take over the whole building, Soviet-style, and given how lovely the housing situation is currently, I'm thinking I may have to figure out how to make it happen for real. I don't have a guillotine but there was a sickle in amongst all my dad's tools. I will get to sharpening that. Rime posted:Yeah, my mom is on disability and there is straight up nowhere for her to rent in BC, and she can't really leave the lower mainland because she needs medical care. I'll be funneling her money under the table to cover the difference until she dies (more than I have for the past decade, already), pretty much, which will negatively impact my own economic contributions and financial stability.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
Public housing sounds ideal but who is going to pay for it? We need to work with partners in the development industry to come up with cost effective housing solutions that are affordable and help the developer make a profit. If anything we should be cutting red tape like planning and permit costs. We should all be grateful that affordable housing only costs $2703/month.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 01:15
|
|
|
The only red tape the government should be cutting is the connective tissue of capital's head. Workers know how to build, draftsmen and architects how to design. There is zero need for developers and bankers and marketing teams.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 03:08
|
|
|
Singh now, ~coincidentally~ just after the NDP badly loses an Island seat to the Greens, seemingly, but of course vaguely, opposing all fossil fuel development, including LNG, even though he clearly supported the LNG Canada project just a few months ago. The way he's speaking out of both sides of his mouth on LNG reminds me of his unclear explanation of his presence at Sikh nationalist events. He's going to end up wasting all week attempting and failing to explain his dumb self to journalists instead of being asked questions about the NDP's new climate policy. Inevitably in a few days he's going to have another press conference to clearly explain himself. He'll have to walk this back or go all in against all LNG. Going all in against LNG seems like a risky overreach. I think you'd still retain a substantial environmentalist vote by mirroring the BC NDP position, with a compromise position of opposing further LNG development, with the assertion that the BC NDP's climate targets are so tough that aside from this one approved project, further LNG development is not possible. Femtosecond fucked around with this message at 03:38 on May 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:Singh now, ~coincidentally~ just after the NDP badly loses an Island seat to the Greens, seemingly, but of course vaguely, opposing all fossil fuel development, including LNG, even though he clearly supported the LNG Canada project just a few months ago. If he doesn't go all-in against any new carbon-producing projects I'll be seriously tempted to vote for the Greens for the first time in my life. Wishy-washy bullshit gets us nowhere, the planet is on fire, and the environment is now the #1 issue for Canadians. Singh could use this as an opportunity to set himself apart from our other terrible party leaders by proposing sweeping and ambitious climate change plans that could attract the growing number of Canadians who are scared shitless about climate change and the ongoing collapse of our biosphere, but as long as any part of those plans allows more fossil fuel development we'll know that he's not actually taking the problem seriously.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 04:52
|
|
|
Have the greens proposed ending fossil fuel development?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 06:48
|
|
|
Femtosecond posted:Singh now, ~coincidentally~ just after the NDP badly loses an Island seat to the Greens, seemingly, but of course vaguely, opposing all fossil fuel development, including LNG, even though he clearly supported the LNG Canada project just a few months ago. It's not just an Island seat, it's Tommy Douglas's old seat. Also, has Jagmeet ever taken a definitive position on anything?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 09:49
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:If he doesn't go all-in against any new carbon-producing projects I'll be seriously tempted to vote for the Greens for the first time in my life. Wishy-washy bullshit gets us nowhere, the planet is on fire, and the environment is now the #1 issue for Canadians. Singh could use this as an opportunity to set himself apart from our other terrible party leaders by proposing sweeping and ambitious climate change plans that could attract the growing number of Canadians who are scared shitless about climate change and the ongoing collapse of our biosphere, but as long as any part of those plans allows more fossil fuel development we'll know that he's not actually taking the problem seriously. How hard is it to say "I read the IPCC report, poo poo freaked me out, best climate scientists in the world gave us 12 years to get stuff going, my position has changed, why hasn't yours?" It's practically a cliche at this point. Honestly I think Singh has actually moved to the place where he has the best on paper response to climate change, I'm just not convinced he personally 'gets it'.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 12:40
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:If he doesn't go all-in against any new carbon-producing projects I'll be seriously tempted to vote for the Greens for the first time in my life. Wishy-washy bullshit gets us nowhere, the planet is on fire, and the environment is now the #1 issue for Canadians. Singh could use this as an opportunity to set himself apart from our other terrible party leaders by proposing sweeping and ambitious climate change plans that could attract the growing number of Canadians who are scared shitless about climate change and the ongoing collapse of our biosphere, but as long as any part of those plans allows more fossil fuel development we'll know that he's not actually taking the problem seriously. Based on him going full Marco Rubio in this clip I don't really think he could: https://twitter.com/PnPCBC/status/1...l-gas-1.5136172 I seriously want to know who preps this guy for interviews.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 14:51
|
|
|
Normy posted:Have the greens proposed ending fossil fuel development? Not really lol. Go check their policy page. They have explicit points to stop nuclear power and uranium mining but not for the oil sands. It's loving amazing
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 15:35
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:The only red tape the government should be cutting is the connective tissue of capital's head. You've never worked in an engineering or construction environment have you? This works for smaller/simple projects like subdivisions or condos but major infrastructure gets a lot more complex and requires tens of thousands of pages of specifications and wonky funding.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 16:32
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:The only red tape the government should be cutting is the connective tissue of capital's head. This post is amazing
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 16:42
|
|
|
Wilhelm posted:You've never worked in an engineering or construction environment have you? This works for smaller/simple projects like subdivisions or condos but major infrastructure gets a lot more complex and requires tens of thousands of pages of specifications and wonky funding. I have actually, some big military and NRCC contracts. The problem is that in our current neo-liberal hell-state the "cut red tape" is 99% a euphemism for "make it easier for capital to cheat the system without any savings passed on to anyone else" I used to work in mostly construction/development doing fire safety stuff and boy was there a lot of silliness. Silliness in the good cause of safety, silliness developers and project managers would rant and rave about being the "red tape" that's causing the housing crisis and if we just cut it and let them build with "common sense" they could lower costs. A lot of things that seem like insane useless red rape evolved over time for good reasons, like the fact that contractors, engineers, and developers will use every loophole in the book to save a buck even if that means putting lives at risk. I've seen so many people having meltdowns at what they see are "red tape" simply because they don't understand why it exists and how getting rid of it would allow malicious folks to get away with murder. Red tape are the scabs and scar tissue left behind from where capital (or over-worked under-trained labour) attacked a process or law. Then the same people bitch and complain the process isn't smooth. Are there ways to streamline processes and make them more efficient and fast without sacrificing safety, legality, or other important processes? Sure, absolutely. But that's pretty much never what capital and right wing politicians are really doing when they say we "need to cut the red tape"
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 16:47
|
|
|
A great many rules are there because someone did something stupid, and another person said "Gee we oughta have a rule against that." The people who want to erase those rules do so with every intention of doing that same stupid thing themselves. I enjoy creatively re-interpreting policy to get the universe to bend around a job that needs doing, and there's a ton of hinky poo poo you can get away with if you really understand the regs and the process, but sometimes Those Who Think need to accept no for an answer and follow the processes Those Who Do have established to stop someone from getting killed or sued or audited. flakeloaf fucked around with this message at 16:54 on May 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 16:52
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:A great many rules are there because someone died, and another person said "Gee we oughta have a rule against that." Fixed for you
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 16:55
|
|
|
Oh man I flipped through the Green Party platform and wrote up a whole post about how much they suck and then the forums ate it. Basically they suck and I'm mad that Jagmeet also sucks because holy poo poo does Canada need an environmental movement that isn't run by people who think nuclear is scary and GMOs are scary and eating organic is the same thing as decarbonizing.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 17:06
|
|
|
Oh and also I forgot to mention the insane libertarian tax plan that is revenue neutral because cutting income and payroll taxes is balanced out by raising carbon taxes, but then also the carbon tax is itself revenue neutral because all the proceeds are given back to Canadians as cold hard cash. And the page-long section that reads like an MRA ranting about how his ex-wife won't let him see his kids.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 17:09
|
|
|
McGavin posted:Also, has Jagmeet ever taken a definitive position on anything? Yeah to be clear this is what I'm most critical of here. Trying to have it both ways ends up being vague and confusing, and that'll dominate the news cycle instead of whatever other good environmental policy the party is proposing. You could already see this from the news stories yesterday that focused on the 'flip flop'. Make a clear decision either way and explain it clearly.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 20:35 |
|
|
During the Mulcair era, even though I didn't agree with the positioning and strategic choices, I at least understood them and could explain them. Right now it feels like nobody's driving.vyelkin posted:And the page-long section that reads like an MRA ranting about how his ex-wife won't let him see his kids. In general I don't think the current GPC policy documents are super interesting. They have the stink of late-Harper era all over them and don't seem forward looking or a great indication of how Green politicians think. Pinterest Mom fucked around with this message at 17:40 on May 15, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2019 17:30
|
|
