Wow, really appreciate these points. I was mostly thinking about teaching people how to budget, not https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_in_the_Twenty-First_Century.
Wow, really appreciate these points. I was mostly thinking about teaching people how to budget, not https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_in_the_Twenty-First_Century.
It seems kind of ok, everyone agrees that they should be teaching some finance basics. I guess I would.jave preferred to see what outcomes this has had in other places (rather than just trying random experiments on our students). It’d be nice to see if Doug could pass this test himself.
The police illegally surveilled her? This doesn’t seem good at all. She was voted in multiple times. This is almost opposite of what you are saying.
This is bad.
Sometimes home owners will sell their house after retirement for something smaller, live off the difference, then sell that house and use the money from that for long term care, or inheritance.
There’s also the obvious: they worked for something, possibly quite hard, why do they have to pay the price for others? Presumably they’ve been paying taxes all along, and have already been contributing to the greater good.
I guess my feeling is, it’s not so simple to just wreck housing prices. I absolutely feel like corporations, and probably some ultra wealthy don’t work that hard and get most of the rewards (or aren’t even people), like if the money has to come from somewhere there is a clear set of people who could afford to lose some wealth, and not materially effect their life; and that’s not necessarily single dwelling home owners.
I think what’s being said is: if housing prices lower, you are going to ruin some people’s retirement plan – at least some of those people will have worked hard their entire life to purchase and pay off that house. There’s been some incentive to save in this way as well (first time home buyer plan, tax deductions for more ecologically sound houses, that kind of thing).
I suspect he’s probably right, that letting house prices drop would over all make things worse in Canada. My goto solution would be to subsidize housing by increasing taxes on corporations and people/corporations that own more than one house. but i’m not any kind of expert
In most cases yes. However in the cases of fines poor people are more penalized than wealthy, so there should be some proportional consideration there.
this is normal enshittification, we just move on to the next shit.
I’m very lazy so I’d probably start by looking at filters on those sites, if i really wanted to tackle this with programming, i’d:
see if there’s an api, or rss feed for these sites, if so i’d pull that down with a cron job and do filtering locally with probably regex.
if not i’d scrape the html and pull out the relevant links with whatever the latest html parser is for the language i use (i.e. it used to be beautiful soup for python, but there’s i think a new better one).
but as i said i’m rather lazy, and haven’t been on the prowl for jobs for some time.
In my experience only kinda, and by convention (up is on), and three-way switches break this (indicator becomes the light itself).
I know halifax has some shit history that i didn’t learn in school – i think i mostly learned about black history from american sources, and my own reading.
Finally some good news! Although I’m sort of surprised this didn’t exist already
oh yeah, not saying it’s a good thing at all…
To my limited knowledge (reading https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/1551870) this seems to be the Canadian norm: you don’t own the land under your land
I haven’t read the article…yet (after a skim I agree with the article). I really don’t know how to feel about the gay/trans issue as I’m fine with my kids being gay or trans, but I don’t want anyone dictating to me what religion or philosophy I raise my kids with, so I feel like I shouldn’t get to say what the nut jobs believe it what they tell their children (to a point)… This is tough
You aren’t a parent are you? Cause children will actually hurt themselves badly, and really do need active care at an early age.
For older children setting boundaries for your children so they aren’t assholes is “determining best interests”.
I don’t want people telling me what religion or philosophy to raise my kids in, I kind of think of this as parents rights. Of course as kids get to be adults those go away.
As a parent, this is a parenting/personal issue, fuck off and please spend my money doing useful things (like supporting health care, or housing) not attempting to protect my children.
Skim the article, it’s 20 large municipality’s, nowhere is 0 mentioned
It seems like you maybe thinking this is saying police do nothing, it isn’t.
No consistent association means the data doesn’t back up higher or lower funding having an impact on crime. It doesn’t say anything about rates when the funding is zero or when funding is very high.
I think it means can’t pay to reduce crime, or not pay and expect crime to go up.
Testing for zero would be extremely difficult, because we only have one Toronto sized city in Canada.
I’m guessing here but I suspect that there’s a significant number of places with zero police presence that have very little crime. And this article suggests that there are very well funded police presences where crime still happens.
How is it impossible to be true?
I’m not sure how you could make this argument without making assumptions about base crime rates.
Could be in vogue and also true
Based on the summary it sound like they didn’t lie, just didn’t point out their own inability to deal with it in their own ridings