Truth. My wife is from Winnipeg, and we visit yearly for the Folk Fest.
Coming from Toronto and getting on the Permiter for the first time was...something. I was, "what kind of highway has traffic lights on it?"
Highway 7? Just north of Toronto?
Highway 7 doesn't really count. I still remember when it was Route 7.
Also....it's not the largest "highway" in the area, like the Perimeter is to Winnipeg. And Highway 7 is still more of a highway that the Permiter is also.
I'm not knocking the Permiter or Winnipeg, in the slightest, it was just jarring to me to see what the differences are between the biggest cities in neighboring provinces.
Truth. My wife is from Winnipeg, and we visit yearly for the Folk Fest.
Coming from Toronto and getting on the Permiter for the first time was...something. I was, "what kind of highway has traffic lights on it?"
Highway 7? Just north of Toronto?
Highway 7 doesn't really count. I still remember when it was Route 7.
Also....it's not the largest "highway" in the area, like the Perimeter is to Winnipeg. And Highway 7 is still more of a highway that the Permiter is also.
I'm not knocking the Permiter or Winnipeg, in the slightest, it was just jarring to me to see what the differences are between the biggest cities in neighboring provinces.
Technically, Highway 7 is not a highway north of Toronto. It got downloaded to York Region there. Just... nobody bothered giving it another name.
He didn't answer a tonne of questions but he was able to articulate some positions pretty well.
My opinion of him has been on the rise of late and I hope he succeeds in reining in the circus that is the current CPC.
Chong seems a red tory, and I identify with a lot of his opinions. Some are terrible, but I respect the man, and that he is principled, and trolled his own party for years.
He says shit no other Tory would say, and I don't have to do the Shitty Tory Bingo of: hates gays, climate, non-whites, marijuana, electoral reform.
He's right that th CMHC need revamp, but I don't know if the automatic solution is privatization. I'd need to see more American analogues.
BUT HE DOES HATE TAXES:
"And I'm the most conservative on the economy. My economic plan starts with a huge income tax cut of $18 billion that we would introduce in our first budget (1% of GDP tax cut!)."
"On "soft issues", I believe in rights and freedoms enshrined in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. To me, these are things "real" conservatives believe in too: "freedom of religion", "freedom of conscience", "freedom of expression". A belief that it is not the colour of your skin, or the God you worship (or not) or who your parents were that determines your place in our society, but rather the merits of your hard work that should determine it. A belief in equality of opportunity."
At the same time, he's saying this in a leadership contest where Leary and Leitch exist, so I hope he does well.
At the same time, he's saying this in a leadership contest where Leary and Leitch exist, so I hope he does well.
One common explanation for why Trump won the GOP primary is that there was no decent candidate to choose instead. And it is a fair complaint given the low quality of GOP candidates in 2015-2016.
If we have one decent CPC candidate and end up with O'Leary or Leitch, we will officially be worse than the USA.
At the same time, he's saying this in a leadership contest where Leary and Leitch exist, so I hope he does well.
One common explanation for why Trump won the GOP primary is that there was no decent candidate to choose instead. And it is a fair complaint given the low quality of GOP candidates in 2015-2016.
If we have one decent CPC candidate and end up with O'Leary or Leitch, we will officially be worse than the USA.
The nomination for leaders is a run-off for the Tories, no? If so, I see it similar to what's happening in France. You hope one of the sane candidates makes it to the final ballot to counter La Pen.
So Chong, some boring social conservative, and then a racist as a final ballot, and you hope everyone voting in the leadership race is smart enough (they won't be) to realize crazy tories don't get elected in Canada (yet).
Truth. My wife is from Winnipeg, and we visit yearly for the Folk Fest.
Coming from Toronto and getting on the Permiter for the first time was...something. I was, "what kind of highway has traffic lights on it?"
Highway 1 runs right through the middle of Calgary; for about 20 blocks there's lights at every second intersection or so. (https://goo.gl/maps/vLoGRFNXwdR2, for instance).
At the same time, he's saying this in a leadership contest where Leary and Leitch exist, so I hope he does well.
One common explanation for why Trump won the GOP primary is that there was no decent candidate to choose instead. And it is a fair complaint given the low quality of GOP candidates in 2015-2016.
If we have one decent CPC candidate and end up with O'Leary or Leitch, we will officially be worse than the USA.
The nomination for leaders is a run-off for the Tories, no? If so, I see it similar to what's happening in France. You hope one of the sane candidates makes it to the final ballot to counter La Pen.
So Chong, some boring social conservative, and then a racist as a final ballot, and you hope everyone voting in the leadership race is smart enough (they won't be) to realize crazy tories don't get elected in Canada (yet).
Yes, I'm pretty sure the CPC are using a ranked ballot system for their leadership this time around (a bit ironic ).
I'm definitely hoping for Michael Chong to do well. If the CPC end up with a leader where one of the harshest things I can say is along the lines of, "I have some disagreements with their tax policy", that would be pretty great. He also seems to favor a more cooperative, less partisan tone for how the house operates. From most of what I've heard and seen and read about him so far, I think having him as CPC leader could do a lot of good for the political climate in this country.
The Trans Canada Highway in PEI is called Route 1, and it's generally one lane in either direction with no median. I've been stuck in a twenty-car line on the Transcanada highway behind a tractor going 20 kph while it was blasting Beyonce at volumes loud enough for the guy driving the tractor to (presumably) hear it while he was wearing sound protection over his ears. I've also had to stop at an intersection to allow an Amish horse and buggy to cross.
PEI is the best.
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
The Trans Canada Highway in PEI is called Route 1, and it's generally one lane in either direction with no median. I've been stuck in a twenty-car line on the Transcanada highway behind a tractor going 20 kph while it was blasting Beyonce at volumes loud enough for the guy driving the tractor to (presumably) hear it while he was wearing sound protection over his ears. I've also had to stop at an intersection to allow an Amish horse and buggy to cross.
PEI is the best.
It's called route 1 on the opposite coast, too, if I remember my cross-canada hitchking from 2014 correctly. In the Tofino Harbour they've got a little END OF THE TRANSCANADA HIGHWAY sign to remind you how actually fucking West you are. They've been proud of that shit since at least the 1930s, before the TCH was even built. It's adorable.
Truth. My wife is from Winnipeg, and we visit yearly for the Folk Fest.
Coming from Toronto and getting on the Permiter for the first time was...something. I was, "what kind of highway has traffic lights on it?"
Highway 1 runs right through the middle of Calgary; for about 20 blocks there's lights at every second intersection or so. (https://goo.gl/maps/vLoGRFNXwdR2, for instance).
Yeah highway 1 in Calgary turns into just like, a regular road albeit a wide one.
I haven't been on the Winnipeg perimiter highway in a while but I have driven around it maybe... 5 times? Edmonton has similar highway systems if I remember correctly where it is a high speed highway and then you come up to lights.
In Ontario we have the 400 series highways which I don't think ever have lights. Other provinces have similar highways but nothing on the same scale I believe. In Southern Ontario we get used to the idea that what a "highway" looks like, is what a 400 series highway is. Stuff like highway 7 is literally a highway, its in the name, but I don't think of it as a highway.
I guess its more of a "freeway vs highway" thing. People, myself included, often say "highway" when what we mean is "freeway", or "expressway", or "controlled-access highway" (and I literally just googled to learn the distinction).
+3
Options
AegisFear My DanceOvershot Toronto, Landed in OttawaRegistered Userregular
In Northern Ontario, the Highway was a stretch of two-lane road that occasionally had passing lanes.
Hell, it still is. I'm going to be dead and buried and they still won't have finished 4 laning Thunder Bay to anywhere.
In Northern Ontario, the Highway was a stretch of two-lane road that occasionally had passing lanes.
Hell, it still is. I'm going to be dead and buried and they still won't have finished 4 laning Thunder Bay to anywhere.
The drive from wawa to thunder bay is still probably my favorite stretch of road in the eastern side of the country. Great lakes on one side and beautiful forests on the other.
And I'm assuming the family from the hills have eyes somewhere among there. Some of those small towns are.... interesting.
Truth. My wife is from Winnipeg, and we visit yearly for the Folk Fest.
Coming from Toronto and getting on the Permiter for the first time was...something. I was, "what kind of highway has traffic lights on it?"
Highway 1 runs right through the middle of Calgary; for about 20 blocks there's lights at every second intersection or so. (https://goo.gl/maps/vLoGRFNXwdR2, for instance).
Yeah highway 1 in Calgary turns into just like, a regular road albeit a wide one.
I haven't been on the Winnipeg perimiter highway in a while but I have driven around it maybe... 5 times? Edmonton has similar highway systems if I remember correctly where it is a high speed highway and then you come up to lights.
In Ontario we have the 400 series highways which I don't think ever have lights. Other provinces have similar highways but nothing on the same scale I believe. In Southern Ontario we get used to the idea that what a "highway" looks like, is what a 400 series highway is. Stuff like highway 7 is literally a highway, its in the name, but I don't think of it as a highway.
I guess its more of a "freeway vs highway" thing. People, myself included, often say "highway" when what we mean is "freeway", or "expressway", or "controlled-access highway" (and I literally just googled to learn the distinction).
Yep, the Yellowhead has lights all along it.
It's alright, though, we're taking them all out.
Unfortunately, it's going to cost 1 billion and take 10 years.
The Trans Canada Highway in PEI is called Route 1, and it's generally one lane in either direction with no median. I've been stuck in a twenty-car line on the Transcanada highway behind a tractor going 20 kph while it was blasting Beyonce at volumes loud enough for the guy driving the tractor to (presumably) hear it while he was wearing sound protection over his ears. I've also had to stop at an intersection to allow an Amish horse and buggy to cross.
PEI is the best.
It's called route 1 on the opposite coast, too, if I remember my cross-canada hitchking from 2014 correctly. In the Tofino Harbour they've got a little END OF THE TRANSCANADA HIGHWAY sign to remind you how actually fucking West you are. They've been proud of that shit since at least the 1930s, before the TCH was even built. It's adorable.
Its called Highway 4, sorry. Highway 1 is what runs along the east side of Vancouver Island from Victoria to Nanaimo before it turns into Highway 19.
Glad you liked Tofino though, harder for me what with the wealth disparity in BC and this area in particular going off the rails.
Truth. My wife is from Winnipeg, and we visit yearly for the Folk Fest.
Coming from Toronto and getting on the Permiter for the first time was...something. I was, "what kind of highway has traffic lights on it?"
Highway 1 runs right through the middle of Calgary; for about 20 blocks there's lights at every second intersection or so. (https://goo.gl/maps/vLoGRFNXwdR2, for instance).
Yeah highway 1 in Calgary turns into just like, a regular road albeit a wide one.
I haven't been on the Winnipeg perimiter highway in a while but I have driven around it maybe... 5 times? Edmonton has similar highway systems if I remember correctly where it is a high speed highway and then you come up to lights.
In Ontario we have the 400 series highways which I don't think ever have lights. Other provinces have similar highways but nothing on the same scale I believe. In Southern Ontario we get used to the idea that what a "highway" looks like, is what a 400 series highway is. Stuff like highway 7 is literally a highway, its in the name, but I don't think of it as a highway.
I guess its more of a "freeway vs highway" thing. People, myself included, often say "highway" when what we mean is "freeway", or "expressway", or "controlled-access highway" (and I literally just googled to learn the distinction).
Yep, the Yellowhead has lights all along it.
It's alright, though, we're taking them all out.
Unfortunately, it's going to cost 1 billion and take 10 years.
I remember the yellowhead being a pothole infested nightmare
I popped a tire once on a particularly big pothole. The next day it was pylon'd off. Fucking edmonton, fix your fucking roads
The Trans Canada Highway in PEI is called Route 1, and it's generally one lane in either direction with no median. I've been stuck in a twenty-car line on the Transcanada highway behind a tractor going 20 kph while it was blasting Beyonce at volumes loud enough for the guy driving the tractor to (presumably) hear it while he was wearing sound protection over his ears. I've also had to stop at an intersection to allow an Amish horse and buggy to cross.
PEI is the best.
It's called route 1 on the opposite coast, too, if I remember my cross-canada hitchking from 2014 correctly. In the Tofino Harbour they've got a little END OF THE TRANSCANADA HIGHWAY sign to remind you how actually fucking West you are. They've been proud of that shit since at least the 1930s, before the TCH was even built. It's adorable.
Its called Highway 4, sorry. Highway 1 is what runs along the east side of Vancouver Island from Victoria to Nanaimo before it turns into Highway 19.
Glad you liked Tofino though, harder for me what with the wealth disparity in BC and this area in particular going off the rails.
The end of Highway One is in Victoria next to Beacon Hill Park, only a few blocks from Emily Carr-s house.
In Northern Ontario, the Highway was a stretch of two-lane road that occasionally had passing lanes.
Hell, it still is. I'm going to be dead and buried and they still won't have finished 4 laning Thunder Bay to anywhere.
The drive from wawa to thunder bay is still probably my favorite stretch of road in the eastern side of the country. Great lakes on one side and beautiful forests on the other.
And I'm assuming the family from the hills have eyes somewhere among there. Some of those small towns are.... interesting.
This really is a beautiful drive. Winding up and down those curvy hill roads on the Trans-Canada, coming around a bend and see the blue water of Lake Superior sparkling away, framed by the forest....Yeah....That was a nice drive.
Now to do it again one day in a sexy touring car with my sexy lady....and not in a Kia with a wailing 8 month old in the back who really, really wanted out of the fucking car seat.
Does anyone know if the planned pilot program for UBI in Ontario would be applicable to new residents of the province? Or where they would intend to roll it out?
I would seriously begin considering a move out east (though jfc how???) if it will cover new residents.
Or maybe we can get Horgan in office here and convince him to try and replicate it?
In Northern Ontario, the Highway was a stretch of two-lane road that occasionally had passing lanes.
Hell, it still is. I'm going to be dead and buried and they still won't have finished 4 laning Thunder Bay to anywhere.
The drive from wawa to thunder bay is still probably my favorite stretch of road in the eastern side of the country. Great lakes on one side and beautiful forests on the other.
And I'm assuming the family from the hills have eyes somewhere among there. Some of those small towns are.... interesting.
That was the best part of the drive from Ontario till you hit the Rockies. Once you pass Thunder Bay is got real boring real fast.
In general it's hilarious how long it takes you to get through Ontario compared to any other province though. Christ it just never fucking ends.
In Northern Ontario, the Highway was a stretch of two-lane road that occasionally had passing lanes.
Hell, it still is. I'm going to be dead and buried and they still won't have finished 4 laning Thunder Bay to anywhere.
The drive from wawa to thunder bay is still probably my favorite stretch of road in the eastern side of the country. Great lakes on one side and beautiful forests on the other.
And I'm assuming the family from the hills have eyes somewhere among there. Some of those small towns are.... interesting.
That was the best part of the drive from Ontario till you hit the Rockies. Once you pass Thunder Bay is got real boring real fast.
In general it's hilarious how long it takes you to get through Ontario compared to any other province though. Christ it just never fucking ends.
No kidding!
It's kind of amazing how quickly it gets boring once you get past TB. We stopped for the night in Ignace, Ontario. I'm sorry if there are any locals here but wow was I getting deliverance vibes.
The first time we drove the Rockies it blew our minds though... I thought I knew what mountains were.
Coyne breaks it down really well, and he's right. With Montreal calling for Sanctuary status, a lot of Montrealers including some friends are going, 'yeah, sure but you should bay for the literally crumbling city infrastructure before bogging down out entire system', and I somewhat agree.
There is nothing wrong with bringing in a lot of immigrants. However, I do not believe we have a system in place. If it gets bad in Canada (and it might not), Trudeau's gonna get nailed hard on this.
Coyne breaks it down really well, and he's right. With Montreal calling for Sanctuary status, a lot of Montrealers including some friends are going, 'yeah, sure but you should bay for the literally crumbling city infrastructure before bogging down out entire system', and I somewhat agree.
There is nothing wrong with bringing in a lot of immigrants. However, I do not believe we have a system in place. If it gets bad in Canada (and it might not), Trudeau's gonna get nailed hard on this.
Strange times.
I just worry that we get into a (much much smaller scale) version of what happened with Europe when Germany declared they would take anyone. A sudden influx of refugees is going to cause a whole bunch of political and social shenanigans
Coyne breaks it down really well, and he's right. With Montreal calling for Sanctuary status, a lot of Montrealers including some friends are going, 'yeah, sure but you should bay for the literally crumbling city infrastructure before bogging down out entire system', and I somewhat agree.
There is nothing wrong with bringing in a lot of immigrants. However, I do not believe we have a system in place. If it gets bad in Canada (and it might not), Trudeau's gonna get nailed hard on this.
Strange times.
I just worry that we get into a (much much smaller scale) version of what happened with Europe when Germany declared they would take anyone. A sudden influx of refugees is going to cause a whole bunch of political and social shenanigans
The US has 10x our population. We couldn't handle all their illegal immigrants, but whether that will actually manifest remains to be seen. Many illegal immigrants in the US have local community roots or connections to nearby Central American countries, and may not wish to uproot for Canada. It is a real problem, doubly so because we don't know if what we're seeing now is just the beginning or already the worst, triply so because the issue is so politically polarized between, "They're stealing our jerbs!" and "Fuck nation-states, open-borders for everybody!"
I mean, not to pick on you omnomnom, but the idea that Montreal taking in more illegal immigrants will have a negative impact on Montreal's infrastructure problem is pretty silly. What's Montreal's infrastructure deficit, in the billions? The "cost" of becoming a sanctuary city is pitiful next to that. It's not like this deficit wasn't built up over decades of intentional neglect by Montrealers and has nothing to do with illegal immigrants; it's Montrealers who haven't paid for the literally crumbling city infrastructure. (Just as in Toronto. Tear down the Gardiner? BOOO. Rebuild it at the cost of $500M? Yay! Raise property taxes? BOOO. Implement road tolls? BOOO. Blame the gravy train/illegal immigrants and refugees? Yay!)
The only causal explanation is that somehow money that would go to Montreal's infrastructure is being diverted to illegal immigrants - that is if Montreal didn't become a sanctuary city, whatever money it saved would be spent on infrastructure instead, but we've had years worth of evidence indicating that this is not true, that in the absence of becoming a sanctuary city, Montreal's infrastructure deficit continued to grow regardless.
Coyne breaks it down really well, and he's right. With Montreal calling for Sanctuary status, a lot of Montrealers including some friends are going, 'yeah, sure but you should bay for the literally crumbling city infrastructure before bogging down out entire system', and I somewhat agree.
There is nothing wrong with bringing in a lot of immigrants. However, I do not believe we have a system in place. If it gets bad in Canada (and it might not), Trudeau's gonna get nailed hard on this.
Strange times.
I just worry that we get into a (much much smaller scale) version of what happened with Europe when Germany declared they would take anyone. A sudden influx of refugees is going to cause a whole bunch of political and social shenanigans
The US has 10x our population. We couldn't handle all their illegal immigrants, but whether that will actually manifest remains to be seen. Many illegal immigrants in the US have local community roots or connections to nearby Central American countries, and may not wish to uproot for Canada. It is a real problem, doubly so because we don't know if what we're seeing now is just the beginning or already the worst, triply so because the issue is so politically polarized between, "They're stealing our jerbs!" and "Fuck nation-states, open-borders for everybody!"
I mean, not to pick on you omnomnom, but the idea that Montreal taking in more illegal immigrants will have a negative impact on Montreal's infrastructure problem is pretty silly. What's Montreal's infrastructure deficit, in the billions? The "cost" of becoming a sanctuary city is pitiful next to that. It's not like this deficit wasn't built up over decades of intentional neglect by Montrealers and has nothing to do with illegal immigrants; it's Montrealers who haven't paid for the literally crumbling city infrastructure. (Just as in Toronto. Tear down the Gardiner? BOOO. Rebuild it at the cost of $500M? Yay! Raise property taxes? BOOO. Implement road tolls? BOOO. Blame the gravy train/illegal immigrants and refugees? Yay!)
The only causal explanation is that somehow money that would go to Montreal's infrastructure is being diverted to illegal immigrants - that is if Montreal didn't become a sanctuary city, whatever money it saved would be spent on infrastructure instead, but we've had years worth of evidence indicating that this is not true, that in the absence of becoming a sanctuary city, Montreal's infrastructure deficit continued to grow regardless.
It's Quebeckers and Ontarians who haven't paid mostly. The costs extend beyond those living within city limits, just as the infrastructure does. This is probably the biggest reason stuff doesn't get paid for.
Coyne breaks it down really well, and he's right. With Montreal calling for Sanctuary status, a lot of Montrealers including some friends are going, 'yeah, sure but you should bay for the literally crumbling city infrastructure before bogging down out entire system', and I somewhat agree.
There is nothing wrong with bringing in a lot of immigrants. However, I do not believe we have a system in place. If it gets bad in Canada (and it might not), Trudeau's gonna get nailed hard on this.
Strange times.
I just worry that we get into a (much much smaller scale) version of what happened with Europe when Germany declared they would take anyone. A sudden influx of refugees is going to cause a whole bunch of political and social shenanigans
The US has 10x our population. We couldn't handle all their illegal immigrants, but whether that will actually manifest remains to be seen. Many illegal immigrants in the US have local community roots or connections to nearby Central American countries, and may not wish to uproot for Canada. It is a real problem, doubly so because we don't know if what we're seeing now is just the beginning or already the worst, triply so because the issue is so politically polarized between, "They're stealing our jerbs!" and "Fuck nation-states, open-borders for everybody!"
I mean, not to pick on you omnomnom, but the idea that Montreal taking in more illegal immigrants will have a negative impact on Montreal's infrastructure problem is pretty silly. What's Montreal's infrastructure deficit, in the billions? The "cost" of becoming a sanctuary city is pitiful next to that. It's not like this deficit wasn't built up over decades of intentional neglect by Montrealers and has nothing to do with illegal immigrants; it's Montrealers who haven't paid for the literally crumbling city infrastructure. (Just as in Toronto. Tear down the Gardiner? BOOO. Rebuild it at the cost of $500M? Yay! Raise property taxes? BOOO. Implement road tolls? BOOO. Blame the gravy train/illegal immigrants and refugees? Yay!)
The only causal explanation is that somehow money that would go to Montreal's infrastructure is being diverted to illegal immigrants - that is if Montreal didn't become a sanctuary city, whatever money it saved would be spent on infrastructure instead, but we've had years worth of evidence indicating that this is not true, that in the absence of becoming a sanctuary city, Montreal's infrastructure deficit continued to grow regardless.
I agree that it's quite absurd to find clear causal implications between immigration with infrastructure, especially in Montreal's case. But I also believe we are not the average Canadian, whose current knowledge of events are thus:
A) My basic news diet tells me Europe is having collective trouble adjusting to large-scale refugee immigration America is locking up its borders, and some people are fleeing there to come to my country
C) These people were arrested and processed, but my Prime Minister just said that Canada won't turn people away
D) There is a movement to make some cities, including mine, a Sanctuary City, effectively welcoming refugees into my city
And I don't think that's a stretch. That's accounting for a fairly well informed person putting some effort into understanding what's going on. These people do exist, and you combine this understanding of events, combine it with E) A collective hatred for the cities infrastructure and growing frustration that Montreal is literally crumbling, and go 'why the fuck are we making this a sanctuary city for these people, when it's a shit hole for the rest of us?'
If somewhat simplistic, I do think it's a valid concern simply because quite a few people perceive it to be. If anything, seeing how Trump was elected has made me more amicable to at least listening to more sides. A lot of racists and bigots will obfuscate the truth on Sanctuary Cities, but I'm truly compelled to hear out the honest voices on this. And if their logic is as above (and I'm basically recreating two separate and eerily similar conversations I've had this week from a former and current Montrealer) then that's at least worth hearing out. Regardless of how much a SC costs, that these people perceive the costs as they do means there are underlying anxieties.
Are they racially based? Maybe, but Montreal's fucking weird like that. I see the sanctuary city movement as a bellwether for how people will potentially take an increase immigration if, as Coyne says, it actually happens.
The important thing to keep in mind is that comparing the European refugee situation with anything that has happened on this continent anytime in the last century, including right now, is completely absurd. We're talking about hundreds or thousands of people, not millions or tens of millions, and most of those hundreds or thousands have already gone through levels of screening that most people in this thread had better hope they never need to endure. It's not a situation of The Alien Hordes Storming The Borders, as much as most conservatives like to decribe it in those sorts of terms. It's a tenth to a quarter percent of the population annually, like it's been for awhile, including (depending on how you count) the 6-10 or so big refugee movements we've had since the end of the Second World War.
That said, the perceptions are a distressing hurdle. Canadians, overall, are and have always been profoundly hostile to immigration, but this is the first time in awhile that's been welded to the country next door making the fundamental core of their national policy ramping up their own hostility to it. I expect the government (provincial and federal, for a change) to at least try to do the right thing - bearing in mind that crises are, well, crises, and there's a limit to how much wackiness people could have planned for here - but I am worried about a large chunk of the electorate and the CPC in particular latching onto a red meat issue to the point where we spend the next several years in a constant, increasingly bigoted FUDfest over this. All the previous big movements got ugly too, but it was in a less coherent, organized manner, and usually without a major federal party choosing to side with the ugliness.
The important thing to keep in mind is that comparing the European refugee situation with anything that has happened on this continent anytime in the last century, including right now, is completely absurd. We're talking about hundreds or thousands of people, not millions or tens of millions, and most of those hundreds or thousands have already gone through levels of screening that most people in this thread had better hope they never need to endure. It's not a situation of The Alien Hordes Storming The Borders, as much as most conservatives like to decribe it in those sorts of terms. It's a tenth to a quarter percent of the population annually, like it's been for awhile, including (depending on how you count) the 6-10 or so big refugee movements we've had since the end of the Second World War.
That said, the perceptions are a distressing hurdle. Canadians, overall, are and have always been profoundly hostile to immigration, but this is the first time in awhile that's been welded to the country next door making the fundamental core of their national policy ramping up their own hostility to it. I expect the government (provincial and federal, for a change) to at least try to do the right thing - bearing in mind that crises are, well, crises, and there's a limit to how much wackiness people could have planned for here - but I am worried about a large chunk of the electorate and the CPC in particular latching onto a red meat issue to the point where we spend the next several years in a constant, increasingly bigoted FUDfest over this. All the previous big movements got ugly too, but it was in a less coherent, organized manner, and usually without a major federal party choosing to side with the ugliness.
The smaller your population the more countries tend to be hesitant about immigration. It takes a smaller influx to affect the "norm".
I just think some lessons can be learned from what Europe has gone though without going full Trump on everything.
The important thing to keep in mind is that comparing the European refugee situation with anything that has happened on this continent anytime in the last century, including right now, is completely absurd. We're talking about hundreds or thousands of people, not millions or tens of millions, and most of those hundreds or thousands have already gone through levels of screening that most people in this thread had better hope they never need to endure. It's not a situation of The Alien Hordes Storming The Borders, as much as most conservatives like to decribe it in those sorts of terms. It's a tenth to a quarter percent of the population annually, like it's been for awhile, including (depending on how you count) the 6-10 or so big refugee movements we've had since the end of the Second World War.
That said, the perceptions are a distressing hurdle. Canadians, overall, are and have always been profoundly hostile to immigration, but this is the first time in awhile that's been welded to the country next door making the fundamental core of their national policy ramping up their own hostility to it. I expect the government (provincial and federal, for a change) to at least try to do the right thing - bearing in mind that crises are, well, crises, and there's a limit to how much wackiness people could have planned for here - but I am worried about a large chunk of the electorate and the CPC in particular latching onto a red meat issue to the point where we spend the next several years in a constant, increasingly bigoted FUDfest over this. All the previous big movements got ugly too, but it was in a less coherent, organized manner, and usually without a major federal party choosing to side with the ugliness.
The smaller your population the more countries tend to be hesitant about immigration. It takes a smaller influx to affect the "norm".
I just think some lessons can be learned from what Europe has gone though without going full Trump on everything.
I don't, since our norm hasn't appreciably changed. There's no real grounds for comparison.
Immigration has been steady at approximately one percent of national population, with occasional dips, since the 1960s. (Typically about 300-350,000 annually, with a cap being decided each year.)
Refugee admission has been relatively consistent at approximately one tenth to one-fifteenth of one percent of national population, with occasional drops during quiet periods or spikes during crises like last year, also since the 1960s. (Typically about 25-30,000 annually, roughly evenly divided between UNHCR refugees and people specially admitted as persecuted or threatened groups, e.g., gay people from Iran or Britons who don't like the local football team.)
The demographics of those arrivals has varied over periods of decades, but has been pretty consistent since the 1990s, continuing on a gradual pattern that began with the 1967 Act.
The Syrian refugee movement is in addition to the annual refugee admission figures, as it is a special program specifically launched by IRC as opposed to the standard day-to-day applications. We do one of these roughly every, oh, five or so years on smaller scales (under 10,000, usually under 5,000). This is a big spike in our refugee figures, roughly doubling it - to about a quarter of one percent of the population. That number is only really significant insofar as people are freaking out and assuming it's vastly more significant than it is, e.g., the deeply, deeply ignorant presumption that they're all terrorists or at least unscreened randos picked up off the street and airdropped into the country blindly.
It is, depending on how you count, the fourth largest mass refugee influx into the country since Confederation.
The frontier is not being overwhelmed. The cities are not drowning in foreigners. The nation's demographics aren't being hauled towards some scary new reality. Absolutely nothing going on at the Canadian borders right now is new to this country.
Not even the illegal US border crossings! The only thing different this time is that they're re-displaced refugees rather than American war resisters, and even then the broadest strokes of the processing of the situation at the border aren't that different.
The main "norm" being changed right now is that the very traditional fears are being fed by the rhetoric coming out of the US, coupled with the fact that the leadership, such as it is, of a major political party is openly embracing it for once. That, coupled with the same rhetoric making people as a whole really comfortable dragging the language about immigrants and refugees back into the fetid gutter where it was in 1979 during a much larger wave of people than the current one, is what worries me. It worries me infinitely more than any thoughts of what the people coming here will do to the country.
It’s possible that smallpox killed as many as 95 per cent of the population of the Georgia Strait. Given that estimate, as many as 100,000 people may have lived in the area at a time when the entire state of New York counted barely 200,000.
Posts
Highway 7 doesn't really count. I still remember when it was Route 7.
Also....it's not the largest "highway" in the area, like the Perimeter is to Winnipeg. And Highway 7 is still more of a highway that the Permiter is also.
I'm not knocking the Permiter or Winnipeg, in the slightest, it was just jarring to me to see what the differences are between the biggest cities in neighboring provinces.
Technically, Highway 7 is not a highway north of Toronto. It got downloaded to York Region there. Just... nobody bothered giving it another name.
Highway 11/17 west of Thunder Bay.
Chong seems a red tory, and I identify with a lot of his opinions. Some are terrible, but I respect the man, and that he is principled, and trolled his own party for years.
He says shit no other Tory would say, and I don't have to do the Shitty Tory Bingo of: hates gays, climate, non-whites, marijuana, electoral reform.
He's right that th CMHC need revamp, but I don't know if the automatic solution is privatization. I'd need to see more American analogues.
BUT HE DOES HATE TAXES:
"And I'm the most conservative on the economy. My economic plan starts with a huge income tax cut of $18 billion that we would introduce in our first budget (1% of GDP tax cut!)."
"On "soft issues", I believe in rights and freedoms enshrined in our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. To me, these are things "real" conservatives believe in too: "freedom of religion", "freedom of conscience", "freedom of expression". A belief that it is not the colour of your skin, or the God you worship (or not) or who your parents were that determines your place in our society, but rather the merits of your hard work that should determine it. A belief in equality of opportunity."
At the same time, he's saying this in a leadership contest where Leary and Leitch exist, so I hope he does well.
One common explanation for why Trump won the GOP primary is that there was no decent candidate to choose instead. And it is a fair complaint given the low quality of GOP candidates in 2015-2016.
If we have one decent CPC candidate and end up with O'Leary or Leitch, we will officially be worse than the USA.
The nomination for leaders is a run-off for the Tories, no? If so, I see it similar to what's happening in France. You hope one of the sane candidates makes it to the final ballot to counter La Pen.
So Chong, some boring social conservative, and then a racist as a final ballot, and you hope everyone voting in the leadership race is smart enough (they won't be) to realize crazy tories don't get elected in Canada (yet).
Highway 1 runs right through the middle of Calgary; for about 20 blocks there's lights at every second intersection or so. (https://goo.gl/maps/vLoGRFNXwdR2, for instance).
Yes, I'm pretty sure the CPC are using a ranked ballot system for their leadership this time around (a bit ironic
I'm definitely hoping for Michael Chong to do well. If the CPC end up with a leader where one of the harshest things I can say is along the lines of, "I have some disagreements with their tax policy", that would be pretty great. He also seems to favor a more cooperative, less partisan tone for how the house operates. From most of what I've heard and seen and read about him so far, I think having him as CPC leader could do a lot of good for the political climate in this country.
PEI is the place to go for highways.
The Trans Canada Highway in PEI is called Route 1, and it's generally one lane in either direction with no median. I've been stuck in a twenty-car line on the Transcanada highway behind a tractor going 20 kph while it was blasting Beyonce at volumes loud enough for the guy driving the tractor to (presumably) hear it while he was wearing sound protection over his ears. I've also had to stop at an intersection to allow an Amish horse and buggy to cross.
PEI is the best.
He seems to be a pragmatic person, and he was there to talk about his motion to expand Question Period to allow for more substantive discussion.
He's the kind of Tory that younger me liked, y'know before I realized taxes were a bargain.
It's called route 1 on the opposite coast, too, if I remember my cross-canada hitchking from 2014 correctly. In the Tofino Harbour they've got a little END OF THE TRANSCANADA HIGHWAY sign to remind you how actually fucking West you are. They've been proud of that shit since at least the 1930s, before the TCH was even built. It's adorable.
I want a strong opposition regardless of who that is. Valid concerns and debate are what make our parliamentary system great.
Yeah highway 1 in Calgary turns into just like, a regular road albeit a wide one.
I haven't been on the Winnipeg perimiter highway in a while but I have driven around it maybe... 5 times? Edmonton has similar highway systems if I remember correctly where it is a high speed highway and then you come up to lights.
In Ontario we have the 400 series highways which I don't think ever have lights. Other provinces have similar highways but nothing on the same scale I believe. In Southern Ontario we get used to the idea that what a "highway" looks like, is what a 400 series highway is. Stuff like highway 7 is literally a highway, its in the name, but I don't think of it as a highway.
I guess its more of a "freeway vs highway" thing. People, myself included, often say "highway" when what we mean is "freeway", or "expressway", or "controlled-access highway" (and I literally just googled to learn the distinction).
Hell, it still is. I'm going to be dead and buried and they still won't have finished 4 laning Thunder Bay to anywhere.
Currently DMing: None
Characters
[5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
The drive from wawa to thunder bay is still probably my favorite stretch of road in the eastern side of the country. Great lakes on one side and beautiful forests on the other.
And I'm assuming the family from the hills have eyes somewhere among there. Some of those small towns are.... interesting.
Yep, the Yellowhead has lights all along it.
It's alright, though, we're taking them all out.
Unfortunately, it's going to cost 1 billion and take 10 years.
Its called Highway 4, sorry. Highway 1 is what runs along the east side of Vancouver Island from Victoria to Nanaimo before it turns into Highway 19.
Glad you liked Tofino though, harder for me what with the wealth disparity in BC and this area in particular going off the rails.
I remember the yellowhead being a pothole infested nightmare
I popped a tire once on a particularly big pothole. The next day it was pylon'd off. Fucking edmonton, fix your fucking roads
The end of Highway One is in Victoria next to Beacon Hill Park, only a few blocks from Emily Carr-s house.
This really is a beautiful drive. Winding up and down those curvy hill roads on the Trans-Canada, coming around a bend and see the blue water of Lake Superior sparkling away, framed by the forest....Yeah....That was a nice drive.
Now to do it again one day in a sexy touring car with my sexy lady....and not in a Kia with a wailing 8 month old in the back who really, really wanted out of the fucking car seat.
Just saying "Wow. WOW. Woooow. Wow." near-constantly.
Similar experience on BC-4.
Makes me miss BC, a lot.
I hate that shit!
Does anyone know if the planned pilot program for UBI in Ontario would be applicable to new residents of the province? Or where they would intend to roll it out?
I would seriously begin considering a move out east (though jfc how???) if it will cover new residents.
Or maybe we can get Horgan in office here and convince him to try and replicate it?
HMMMMM
That was the best part of the drive from Ontario till you hit the Rockies. Once you pass Thunder Bay is got real boring real fast.
In general it's hilarious how long it takes you to get through Ontario compared to any other province though. Christ it just never fucking ends.
No kidding!
It's kind of amazing how quickly it gets boring once you get past TB. We stopped for the night in Ignace, Ontario. I'm sorry if there are any locals here but wow was I getting deliverance vibes.
The first time we drove the Rockies it blew our minds though... I thought I knew what mountains were.
Coyne breaks it down really well, and he's right. With Montreal calling for Sanctuary status, a lot of Montrealers including some friends are going, 'yeah, sure but you should bay for the literally crumbling city infrastructure before bogging down out entire system', and I somewhat agree.
There is nothing wrong with bringing in a lot of immigrants. However, I do not believe we have a system in place. If it gets bad in Canada (and it might not), Trudeau's gonna get nailed hard on this.
Strange times.
I just worry that we get into a (much much smaller scale) version of what happened with Europe when Germany declared they would take anyone. A sudden influx of refugees is going to cause a whole bunch of political and social shenanigans
The US has 10x our population. We couldn't handle all their illegal immigrants, but whether that will actually manifest remains to be seen. Many illegal immigrants in the US have local community roots or connections to nearby Central American countries, and may not wish to uproot for Canada. It is a real problem, doubly so because we don't know if what we're seeing now is just the beginning or already the worst, triply so because the issue is so politically polarized between, "They're stealing our jerbs!" and "Fuck nation-states, open-borders for everybody!"
I mean, not to pick on you omnomnom, but the idea that Montreal taking in more illegal immigrants will have a negative impact on Montreal's infrastructure problem is pretty silly. What's Montreal's infrastructure deficit, in the billions? The "cost" of becoming a sanctuary city is pitiful next to that. It's not like this deficit wasn't built up over decades of intentional neglect by Montrealers and has nothing to do with illegal immigrants; it's Montrealers who haven't paid for the literally crumbling city infrastructure. (Just as in Toronto. Tear down the Gardiner? BOOO. Rebuild it at the cost of $500M? Yay! Raise property taxes? BOOO. Implement road tolls? BOOO. Blame the gravy train/illegal immigrants and refugees? Yay!)
The only causal explanation is that somehow money that would go to Montreal's infrastructure is being diverted to illegal immigrants - that is if Montreal didn't become a sanctuary city, whatever money it saved would be spent on infrastructure instead, but we've had years worth of evidence indicating that this is not true, that in the absence of becoming a sanctuary city, Montreal's infrastructure deficit continued to grow regardless.
What stations?
I listen to 1070 and 90.5 and haven't heard any anti-horgan stuff yet.
It's Quebeckers and Ontarians who haven't paid mostly. The costs extend beyond those living within city limits, just as the infrastructure does. This is probably the biggest reason stuff doesn't get paid for.
I agree that it's quite absurd to find clear causal implications between immigration with infrastructure, especially in Montreal's case. But I also believe we are not the average Canadian, whose current knowledge of events are thus:
A) My basic news diet tells me Europe is having collective trouble adjusting to large-scale refugee immigration
C) These people were arrested and processed, but my Prime Minister just said that Canada won't turn people away
D) There is a movement to make some cities, including mine, a Sanctuary City, effectively welcoming refugees into my city
And I don't think that's a stretch. That's accounting for a fairly well informed person putting some effort into understanding what's going on. These people do exist, and you combine this understanding of events, combine it with E) A collective hatred for the cities infrastructure and growing frustration that Montreal is literally crumbling, and go 'why the fuck are we making this a sanctuary city for these people, when it's a shit hole for the rest of us?'
If somewhat simplistic, I do think it's a valid concern simply because quite a few people perceive it to be. If anything, seeing how Trump was elected has made me more amicable to at least listening to more sides. A lot of racists and bigots will obfuscate the truth on Sanctuary Cities, but I'm truly compelled to hear out the honest voices on this. And if their logic is as above (and I'm basically recreating two separate and eerily similar conversations I've had this week from a former and current Montrealer) then that's at least worth hearing out. Regardless of how much a SC costs, that these people perceive the costs as they do means there are underlying anxieties.
Are they racially based? Maybe, but Montreal's fucking weird like that. I see the sanctuary city movement as a bellwether for how people will potentially take an increase immigration if, as Coyne says, it actually happens.
I've heard some on Jack (because I am apparently old now and listen to old-people music from the '80s and '90s).
That said, the perceptions are a distressing hurdle. Canadians, overall, are and have always been profoundly hostile to immigration, but this is the first time in awhile that's been welded to the country next door making the fundamental core of their national policy ramping up their own hostility to it. I expect the government (provincial and federal, for a change) to at least try to do the right thing - bearing in mind that crises are, well, crises, and there's a limit to how much wackiness people could have planned for here - but I am worried about a large chunk of the electorate and the CPC in particular latching onto a red meat issue to the point where we spend the next several years in a constant, increasingly bigoted FUDfest over this. All the previous big movements got ugly too, but it was in a less coherent, organized manner, and usually without a major federal party choosing to side with the ugliness.
The smaller your population the more countries tend to be hesitant about immigration. It takes a smaller influx to affect the "norm".
I just think some lessons can be learned from what Europe has gone though without going full Trump on everything.
I don't, since our norm hasn't appreciably changed. There's no real grounds for comparison.
Immigration has been steady at approximately one percent of national population, with occasional dips, since the 1960s. (Typically about 300-350,000 annually, with a cap being decided each year.)
Refugee admission has been relatively consistent at approximately one tenth to one-fifteenth of one percent of national population, with occasional drops during quiet periods or spikes during crises like last year, also since the 1960s. (Typically about 25-30,000 annually, roughly evenly divided between UNHCR refugees and people specially admitted as persecuted or threatened groups, e.g., gay people from Iran or Britons who don't like the local football team.)
The demographics of those arrivals has varied over periods of decades, but has been pretty consistent since the 1990s, continuing on a gradual pattern that began with the 1967 Act.
The Syrian refugee movement is in addition to the annual refugee admission figures, as it is a special program specifically launched by IRC as opposed to the standard day-to-day applications. We do one of these roughly every, oh, five or so years on smaller scales (under 10,000, usually under 5,000). This is a big spike in our refugee figures, roughly doubling it - to about a quarter of one percent of the population. That number is only really significant insofar as people are freaking out and assuming it's vastly more significant than it is, e.g., the deeply, deeply ignorant presumption that they're all terrorists or at least unscreened randos picked up off the street and airdropped into the country blindly.
It is, depending on how you count, the fourth largest mass refugee influx into the country since Confederation.
The frontier is not being overwhelmed. The cities are not drowning in foreigners. The nation's demographics aren't being hauled towards some scary new reality. Absolutely nothing going on at the Canadian borders right now is new to this country.
Not even the illegal US border crossings! The only thing different this time is that they're re-displaced refugees rather than American war resisters, and even then the broadest strokes of the processing of the situation at the border aren't that different.
The main "norm" being changed right now is that the very traditional fears are being fed by the rhetoric coming out of the US, coupled with the fact that the leadership, such as it is, of a major political party is openly embracing it for once. That, coupled with the same rhetoric making people as a whole really comfortable dragging the language about immigrants and refugees back into the fetid gutter where it was in 1979 during a much larger wave of people than the current one, is what worries me. It worries me infinitely more than any thoughts of what the people coming here will do to the country.
Everyone was dead: When Europeans first came to B.C., they stepped into the aftermath of a holocaust