despite the fact that you decided to just ignore arguments I’ve just laid out, I’ll bite. It is not trivial. In certain areas/regions growing vegetables is more difficult than rearing animals that can convert inedible grass/brush into consumable calories. Trucking in non-meat alternatives is carbon intensive. In other words problem lies with industrial food priduction and distribution regardless of kind of food. If food had to travel 1000 miles to get to your table on top of intensive methods of growing it - it’s carbon footprint is enormous. Also industrial food production implies heavy fossils use at every stage. It’s solving the symptom rather than the cause. Which is why I’d rather see cause addressed before we can turn to symptoms.

Cow is not the only meat. Small example: we use lots of machinery for manicuring lawns, fields etc. This is pollution plain and simple. We use mechanized methods for clearing the brush. Having goats/sheep/other grazers covers both needs without heavy impact on pollution. While it is possible that eat less meat is a thing one has to take into account a lot of other things. Among which eat less period. Obesity pandemic around the globe exacerbates the issue - larger humans consume more calories thus require more production. Food waste is rampant. Estimates pin spoilage at 40%. So, no, I say we should address core issues before we can declare that all options have been exhausted and now we’ve got to cut on meat consumption.

We are a somewhat advanced civilization in possession of math and other science knowledge. Can we not figure out optimal balance instead of jacking everything up in our failure? I mean you’re right extensive replaced with expansive is not much of a solution but we can estimate what kind of load can ecosystem truly sustain. Say, we return the bison and other mammal numbers back to what they used to be, then we measure population growth deriving reasonable ratio for animal consumption at which animal numbers can remain relatively stable. However that will not remove all the other sources of pollution. I just want us to stop “experimenting” on ourselves, animals and environment when we really have no idea what are we doing. In science you go back to previously known good state and reevaluate hypothesis… we’re not doing that, we’re just doubling down on insanity 🙁

they will finance farmers to feed cows some stuff reducing burping but there’s not a word in implication on animals/humans. Like wheat mutation that allowed larger yields but spiked gluten content this has the same potential. How about “stop feeding animals crap they are not supposed to eat”? We’ve had A LOT of bizon and other ruminants grazing this land before we’ve exterminated them with no methane effects seemingly. So perhaps it’s worth looking at sustainable husbandry rather than feedlots and factory farms?

why does the photo look like instant meme?

that too. So no matter how you slice it we do need those jets. Couple of years ago I’d be arguing otherwise.

if anything, war in Ukraine has shown that it’s not all about big equipment if you want to hold position, but to move, you need heavy stuff

funny thing is: “Eternity” looks like it shows totals for my upvotes on posts/comments but not showing what those are

thanks for the tech details. It sucks that there’s no endpoint for upvotes (yet). I find favorites/saved and upvoted to be distinctly different at least the way I use it. Upvotes communicate to me (and others) that content is of value or that I agree with it. However Saved/Favorite may mean that I disagree with content but I’d like to keep reference for future times. That latter is a private info too so nobody benefits from me “saving” that content other than myself.

TLDR; I’d have to get used to hitting upvote and “save” buttons on content of interest and learn to filter through my “saved” stuff while devs are comming up with endpoints for upvotes.

This is actually news in reverse. Considering present world situation (Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan in the works) and the fact that between election in 2016 and now situation is absolutely and categorically different, Canada does need modern fleet. War in Ukraine highlighted all of the weaknesses of old equipment as well as prompted NATO members to be ready to depmoy forces outside of their own borders (yes, russia won’t be attacking Canada, but it may attack nearby NATO states and Canada will have to step in. Sending our pilots for slaughter under those conditions is wreckless).

While I’m no fan of JT and his flipping on promisses, this time I think there’s credit due. Article title should’ve read: “Canadian government reacted to military escalations around the globe by moving forward with fleet upgrade”. We can debate what should fleet be upgraded to, but the fact that it has to be upgraded is obvious.

Trudeau got very cocky… Like PCs did in Alberts when they’ve got their asses handed to them in 2015. Doesn’y change the fact that there’s no single politician fit for the post. He’s just the best of the worst and I bet he knows it. Electoral system should have been fixed as he promissed, that’s when we could’ve had a chance now - forcet it. We’re staring at 4yrs with Cons until folks will get to their senses… or 8 if they don’t. Singh is OK but he lacks drive and charisma to overcome Trudeau and PP. We’re f@ck’d

wouldn’t call it dictatorship. More like self-propelled cleptocracy. Having more power vested in PM suits “winner” parties just fine as it gives them leverage even in minority government. Peak of dictatorial behaviour was under Harper, but Trudeau is a skillful pupil…

I’m with you on most points but first and foremost abolition of party system has got to happen. Our politics just turned into tribalism, “us vs them” game that is being played at our expense. It’s got to stop. I don’t see any more of “lets compromise and work together” and constant “we’ll tear down what other party was building… because it has THEIR name attached”.

FPTP contributes greatly to the lack of political discourse and constant bickering with powergrab moves. It eliminates variaty forcing landscape to oscilate down to 2 options which over time become virtually identical and differ in optics only.

not. going. to. happen. Whatever government will be elected next will be guarding interests of people with (more) money. I.e. landlords and house owners. Unfortunately all we can hope for are band-aids while everything crumbles.

To remove resistance there are multiple possibilities, but most of them involve compensating property owners at fair market value today and disincentivese them from holding on to additional properties moving forward, guaranteeing citizens affordable housing into perpetuity and regulating the heck out of real estate market. This way existing property owners are less likely to stage a coup, and future generations are guaranteed to have roof over their head making real estate market unattractive to investors.

But since we are governed by laws of capitalism and not socialism (no, not the idiotic eastern block interpretation of communism) money loss is vewed as a big no-no (instead of seeing human dignity as a prime goal) - none of the above will happen as parties want to get re-elected and they need money for that… well you get the picture.

Whack-a-mole’ing it with micky-mouse measures will prolong the agony but will not end suffering.

TLDR; solution is to change political system first, otherwise there’s no hope for a real solution to any of this.

at the same time we’ve had the highest immigration numbers. Canada was always immigrant country. I don’t see it as a negative thing in general. Lots of immigrants and their children are higher motivated individuals so it could be a good thing. One thing to watch out for is erosion of values in society. So just welcome newcomers and show them what does it mean to be Canadian 😃

I don’t believe current system is working either. Precisely because we operate under “majority” governments elected by 30% of population. So either 100% of population got to vote or we’re down to referendum.

Here’s the thing: Liberals and Conservatives solutions will always rervolve around giving more money to entities that already sit on variously sized piles of money. Even NDP won’t risk alienating home owners. Political and economic system requires massive rework to actually address underlying issues. However I know of no Canadian political entity ready to sacrifice themselves and go through with necessary changes, including changes to electoral system that sustains current status quo. I’m in Alberta and AB NDP has walked away from the electoral reform as soon as they figured how to win in current system (sort of) so I’d expect the same from gederal NDP, or any party, really as reword system is wired for that. “Small steps” are all cute and heart-warming but they will never solve real problem and with major parties eager to rip out legislation of previous “other party” moving forward is unlikely. Not arguing for dictatorship, rather the opposite - real multi-party system that has to represent all Canadians. Any decision made has to be supported by 51+% of Canadians, not 51% parlamentsrians. (end of rant)

the only way to bend system towards social democracy - progressive taxation is needed on high incomes. Calls to “let landlords die” etc. are unproductive and divisive. Mom-and-pop landlords owning some older family properties, maintaining them and renting them should not be penalized by market or anyone else, as long as rental market is regulated, fiscal policy does not allow for spectacular crashes because of risky investments etc. It’s not a simple problem. Housing is not a privilege - it’s a right and it has to be supported by laws and policies. This approach leaves plenty of room for landlords and removes pressure from tenants as their ability to make rent should be guaranteed. Givernment should be taking human rights nore seriously.

real estate business operations are part of the reason we’re in this mess. At present real estate is a lucrative investment as you can buy properties hold on to them effectively shrinking the market and driving demand up… and driving the price of your investments up. Then, after you’ve bought a place for $300k and it’s market price got to $500k you take out a loan against the remainder and go live in warm places until market conttacts some more and you can repeat the process… TLDR; it pays to buy real estate and just sit on it, which is what real estate companies do (or help others to do)… it does not positively contribute to supply of new housing, quite the opposite. So please tell me that business that literally created this mess for us (and profit for themselves) sponsoring politician is lobbying for more housing? Would they be willing to shoot off their both feet?

So the person advocating to solve housing crisis is spinsored by big real estate? Smells aquatic here… gills and all. There’s a rodent in this pile, that everyone will forget to look for untill it’s too late.