What trips were they taking to the States? I don't think I ever had a field trip out of country, though it's been a while since I graduated. I think the furthest we ever went was Quebec City.
prodigalsorcerer
joined 2 years ago
In this case, I don't think it particularly matters if they care about law and order or not.
Unless USA decides to help them secede with the backing of the American military (which isn't impossible, but for now, we'll call it unlikely), then the secession process is going to go about the same as Michael Scott declaring bankruptcy. They declare it, wave their little F Carney flags around, roll some coal, and continue to be part of Canada.
Every thread where you see "ceo of failing company gets $3M bonus" followed by "those workers could have used that" ignores the fact that there are so many employees that, divided evenly, it's never more than $5, and frequently less than a dollar.
Yes, that's technically better than nothing. And I agree the CEO doesn't deserve a bonus if their company is failing. But focusing on this is missing the bigger picture of the lack of workers' rights in America, and paints a target on the wrong people (CEOs instead of the government).
They can't actually leave. The lands are indigenous and have not been ceded to the province or the crown. There are treaties allowing the crown to use them (in this case, as the province of Alberta), but basically it's as though I've got a tenant in a bedroom saying he's going to keep the bedroom, stop paying rent, and he owns it now.
Wait, I thought we were voting for Pierre Pontiac from the Conversation Party.
The system is designed in such a way that the residents get to make that decision. If they want to choose a non resident to represent them, they are allowed to do that.
In theory, an informed population should vote against this behaviour, but this particular riding will vote conservative until it kills them (which it's likely to do).
Also, don't concentrate people in a single place. It's wrong to have a 4% population growth in Toronto and 0.5% elsewhere.
Is there a mechanism for anchoring immigrants in a specific location? My understanding is that our charter right of freedom of movement means that if everyone wants to go to Toronto, we can't stop them once they're in the country.
Agreed. If the liberals put forth a bill for electoral reform, then I'll believe it.
Alternatively, they could let one of the NDP members create the bill and still vote in favour. That would be a great show of cooperation and good faith between parties, while also showing how minority governments could continue to work well.
You may have voted because of a party, but you still voted for a specific representative. If that representative decides to vote differently than the rest of the party, it's still the same person you voted for.
People shouldn't have to agree. They voted for a candidate, not a party.
With the current state of politics, I think crossing the floor is going to be increasingly unlikely until we get electoral reform, but crossing the floor is much more a symbolic act, sending the message that you no longer agree with your previous party's policies.
If they just stopped voting in line with the party (and got kicked out, and became an independent), would that be fine with you?
Crossing the floor should be fine, possibly even encouraged if you no longer agree with your party's direction. Unless you're saying that all MPs should just follow the party line and not have any original thoughts of their own.
Revenue is a useless metric.
It's about 1.4% of their annual profit.
That seems reasonable given this is only about users in Texas. If this same result were applied to all users and jurisdictions worldwide, we'd be looking at about 200-300% of their annual profit.