Canadian Politics Thread

[King Heffy]

[The Arrogant Worms]

 

[Bob Long]

So this is a win:

 

What we know so far about Google's $100M media fund

The Online News Act comes into effect Dec. 19 - regulations will be published before that date

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/google-money-media-compensation-details-1.7046677

 

 

 

But I thought Skippy said this wasn't possible?

 

[The Arrogant Worms]

 

[The Arrogant Worms]

 

[Alflives]

Poo Poo is a loser McMuffin. Alf will not vote for his C candidate because of PooPoo. 

[UnkNuk]

5 hours ago, Bob Long said:

So this is a win:

 

What we know so far about Google's $100M media fund

The Online News Act comes into effect Dec. 19 - regulations will be published before that date

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/google-money-media-compensation-details-1.7046677

 

 

 

But I thought Skippy said this wasn't possible?

 

 

Something I don't understand about this.

 

Google provides a link to a news story.  People click on the link, go to the news provider's website and read the story.  Isn't that a good thing for the news provider?  They are getting more eyeballs for their stories.  Seems to me the news providers should be thanking Google for the free advertising.

[Bob Long]

8 minutes ago, UnkNuk said:

 

Something I don't understand about this.

 

Google provides a link to a news story.  People click on the link, go to the news provider's website and read the story.  Isn't that a good thing for the news provider?  They are getting more eyeballs for their stories.  Seems to me the news providers should be thanking Google for the free advertising.

 

Content is also used without people clicking on links tho. It's like when you see a quoted tweet on here.

[4petesake]

9 minutes ago, UnkNuk said:

 

Something I don't understand about this.

 

Google provides a link to a news story.  People click on the link, go to the news provider's website and read the story.  Isn't that a good thing for the news provider?  They are getting more eyeballs for their stories.  Seems to me the news providers should be thanking Google for the free advertising.

 

Since Google & Meta have overwhelming dominance in the marketplace there was no necessity for them to fairly compensate the suppliers of content who incurred the costs of production. So while the outlet might have extra eyes on a linked story advertising dollars were going primarily to the mega platforms rather than the creators themselves. 

“Supporters of the bill argue that it would address an imbalance between dominant tech companies and Canadian publishers, by requiring them to provide fair compensation for the dissemination of news content via their platforms. The trade association News Media Canada stated that the bill would "restore fairness and ensure the sustainability of the Canadian news media ecosystem."^[12] The logic is that in the absence of the law, intermediaries leverage Canadian-produced news content without compensation due to their dominance, and thus hold an asymmetric bargaining position.”

[Boudrias]

14 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

 

This how Canadians deal with the issues and the politicians that try to make change. Freeland, Trudeau and Poilievre. Let's throw in the NDP guy too. Or let's point the finger at the Americans and assume our ' better than them ' fallback comforter. Canada has many daunting challenges and if the politicians are failing us then Canadians have to come to the table and force them to bring responsible solutions to the conversation. Sure, it is good to demand more from PP but cheap character assassination of him or JT, CF or JS simply perpetuates the status quo which is not working.

 

What is scary is the lack of financial literacy in Canada that encourages Canadians to demand more than what is affordable. It has always been revenue versus expenses. The fact that politicians can convince voters to ignore this reality and off load their spending to future generations has to end. I drive down the main street of my small town on a Friday late afternoon and I can park anywhere. I ask myself how do these small businesses that line our street make it? How do they keep the doors open? Small businesses are dying and they are the backbone of our country.  

 

[Gurn]

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/alleged-plot-by-indian-intelligence-to-kill-targets-in-canada-and-u-s-reveals-sloppy-spycraft/ar-AA1kWa4K?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=dbae33b63b5d48eb848c3d10e1a2ffdf&ei=25

"

Details of an alleged plot by an Indian intelligence operative to hire hit men to assassinate Sikh separatists in Canada and the United States tells a nitty-gritty tale of lousy spycraft and sloppy underworld street smarts.

A U.S. federal indictment claims American agents secretly tracked the conspiracy day-by-day as a government official in India recruited a self-professed drug trafficker to hire hit men to kill two U.S. citizens and four Canadians deemed enemies of the Indian government.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Much more at link.

[Gurn]

^^

How terrible is it that a foreign government would assassinate people on soil belonging to other countries.?

 

Well, unless it is the U.S. dropping drones on people, in various Middle East countries,-then all good, amirite?

[Bob Long]

Just now, Gurn said:

^^

How terrible is it that a foreign government would assassinate people on soil belonging to other countries.?

 

Well, unless it is the U.S. dropping drones on people, in various Middle East countries,-then all good, amirite?

 

Can you explain the equivalence you see a bit more?

[the destroyer of worlds]

2 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

Can you explain the equivalence you see a bit more?

I think the point is that the US kills people in other countries all the time.  

 

Thing is, the drone strikes don't happen in countries that are allies or in countries where there isn't active armed conflict.  

[Elias Pettersson]

Diane Francis: Canada in deep economic trouble (msn.com)

 

Diane Francis: Canada in deep economic trouble

 

Canada remains a chronic underachiever. Our economy contracted by 1.06 per cent quarter-over-quarter in the third quarter, while the United States economy grew by 5.2 per cent. The European Union and Australia also saw modest economic growth.

 

We may not technically be in a recession yet, but the picture isn’t looking good, according to Bank of Montreal economist Doug Porter.

 

“Whatever label you slap on this economy, it’s basically not growing, despite the artificial sweetener of rapid population growth,” he told CBC News. “The big picture is that the Canadian economy is struggling to grow, yet managing to just keep its head above recession waters.”

 

The question is: how does a country with so much potential and a massive resource endowment end up lagging behind its peers? The answer is simple: Canada’s federal government is run by economic neophytes.

 

On Nov. 21, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland boasted that, “Canada is now a global investment destination of choice … and the IMF projects Canada to likewise see the strongest economic growth in the G7 next year.”

 

But the most recent IMF projection is that U.S. GDP will increase by 2.1 per cent in 2023, but Canada’s will only grow by 1.3 per cent.

 

As for being the “investment destination of choice,” the figures show otherwise. Net foreign direct investment (FDI) plummeted throughout much of the Liberals’ first term.

 

According to figures from the World Population Review, last year, the U.S. led the world, with net FDI inflows of $388 billion, followed by China ($180 billion), Singapore ($141 billion), Hong Kong ($121 billion), France ($105 billion), Brazil ($92 billion), Australia ($67 billion) and Canada ($54 billion).

 

Canada’s economic prospects are not so rosy, either. In its summary of an IMF report released over the summer, the Fraser Institute noted : “Expanding the population and workforce does increase the size of the economy, but the IMF observes that it’s ‘not a recipe for growing per capita income or living standards.’ And the data show that this is where Canada has been failing short; prosperity on a per-person basis has been stagnant since the mid-2010s.…

 

“As for Canada’s investment climate, the IMF suggests it has deteriorated relative to comparator jurisdictions. As evidence, the report cites the fact that gross fixed capital formation (a broad measure of investment) puts Canada in the bottom quartile among the 38 countries that are members of the OECD.…

 

“To explain sluggish Canadian investment, the IMF highlights insufficient product market competition, restrictions on foreign direct investment and government-fostered policy uncertainty that’s hindering new investment in the mining and energy sectors in particular.…

 

“Since 2017, Canada has lost almost all the business tax advantages it previously enjoyed vis-à-vis the United States, a development that undeniably has made the country a less attractive place to deploy capital than it was a decade ago.”

 

Worse, Canadian debts are too high, making businesses, governments and consumers vulnerable to higher interest rates. The IMF provides two metrics that explain the problem.

 

In 2022, Canada’s “ Household debt, loans and debt securities ” as a proportion of the country’s GDP was the highest in the G7. Canada’s indebtedness was equivalent to 102 per cent of its GDP; the United Kingdom was 83 cent; the U.S. was 74 per cent; Germany was 55 per cent; Italy 42 per cent; France 66 per cent; and Japan was 68 per cent.

 

The second metric is Canada’s excessive price-to-income ratio , or the median price paid for property compared to average disposable income. In the middle of this year, Canada’s ratio was 9.6, more than double the U.S. ratio of 4.2.

 

On top of this, excessive government deficits (federal and provincial) hobble Canada’s economy with debt and interest payments. This was foreseen in 2021 when the OECD predicted that Canada will be the worst performing economy for the next decade, and for three decades after that.

 

Numbers matter.

[Bob Long]

1 hour ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

I think the point is that the US kills people in other countries all the time.  

 

Thing is, the drone strikes don't happen in countries that are allies or in countries where there isn't active armed conflict.  

 

kind of an important distinction. 

[4petesake]

2 hours ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

I think the point is that the US kills people in other countries all the time.  

 

Thing is, the drone strikes don't happen in countries that are allies or in countries where there isn't active armed conflict.  

 

Drone strike aside, the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan kind of leaps off the page.

[Bob Long]

3 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

Drone strike aside, the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan kind of leaps off the page.

 

How was that a bad thing?

[4petesake]

2 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

How was that a bad thing?

I didn’t suggest that it was. However to @Gurn’s point one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter and it happened in a country that was an ally and not in active armed conflict. 

 

Also -

 

Led by that man of darkness, William Casey, in 1985 the CIA tried to kill the Lebanese Shia leader Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah by setting off a car bomb outside his mosque. He survived, though 80 others were blown to pieces.

In his book Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, Bill Blum has a long and interesting list starting in 1949 with Kim Koo, Korean opposition leader, going on to efforts to kill Sukarno, Kim Il Sung, Mossadegh, Nehru, Nasser, Sihanouk, Jose Figueres, 'Papa Doc' Duvalier, Gen Rafael Trujillo, Charles de Gaulle, Salvador Allende, Michael Manley, Ayatollah Khomeini, the nine comandantes of the Sandinista National Directorate, Mohamed Farah Aideed, prominent clan leader of Somalia, Slobodan Milosevic...

[Gurn]

2 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

Drone strike aside, the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan kind of leaps off the page.

Killing an Iranian general on Iraqi soil.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-53345885

"The US attack that killed top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani violated international law, a UN expert says.

Soleimani died along with nine other people in a drone strike near Baghdad airport in Iraq in January."

 

Wrong, is wrong, even if your 'friend' is the one doing wrong.

 

Getting upset that other countries are doing the same thing in your country-that has been done to them; is extremely hypocritical.

 

I am fine with Canada being pissed that a foreign government killed someone on Canadian soil, but for the US to get 'morally' mad is just goofy.

Anyway, I mostly posted that link, as it confirms, India is killing people where ever they deem fit, 

All that crap about Trudeau being wrong, and 'jumping the gun' is certifiably just crap.

 

I also have seen SFA from the Conservative Party of Canada, since they first opened their mouths about the Indian government sanctioned killing.

[Bob Long]

15 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

I didn’t suggest that it was. However to @Gurn’s point one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter and it happened in a country that was an ally and not in active armed conflict. 

 

Also -

 

Led by that man of darkness, William Casey, in 1985 the CIA tried to kill the Lebanese Shia leader Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah by setting off a car bomb outside his mosque. He survived, though 80 others were blown to pieces.

In his book Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, Bill Blum has a long and interesting list starting in 1949 with Kim Koo, Korean opposition leader, going on to efforts to kill Sukarno, Kim Il Sung, Mossadegh, Nehru, Nasser, Sihanouk, Jose Figueres, 'Papa Doc' Duvalier, Gen Rafael Trujillo, Charles de Gaulle, Salvador Allende, Michael Manley, Ayatollah Khomeini, the nine comandantes of the Sandinista National Directorate, Mohamed Farah Aideed, prominent clan leader of Somalia, Slobodan Milosevic...

 

Bin laden was no one's freedom fighter.

[Bob Long]

23 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Killing an Iranian general on Iraqi soil.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-53345885

"The US attack that killed top Iranian general Qasem Soleimani violated international law, a UN expert says.

Soleimani died along with nine other people in a drone strike near Baghdad airport in Iraq in January."

 

Wrong, is wrong, even if your 'friend' is the one doing wrong.

 

Getting upset that other countries are doing the same thing in your country-that has been done to them; is extremely hypocritical.

 

I am fine with Canada being pissed that a foreign government killed someone on Canadian soil, but for the US to get 'morally' mad is just goofy.

Anyway, I mostly posted that link, as it confirms, India is killing people where ever they deem fit, 

All that crap about Trudeau being wrong, and 'jumping the gun' is certifiably just crap.

 

I also have seen SFA from the Conservative Party of Canada, since they first opened their mouths about the Indian government sanctioned killing.

 

How is this the same thing? 

 

I guess shooting down a passenger jet in retaliation is just equivalence as well, or are we going to do the they deserved it thing in this thread too?

Edited December 4, 2023 by Bob Long

[4petesake]

9 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Bin laden was no one's freedom fighter.

 

Perspective though Bob.

 

You said (and I agree) “how is that a bad thing?” I would guess that there a lot of folks in India that would make the same argument about the assassinations on Canadian soil. 

[Bob Long]

Just now, 4petesake said:

 

Perspective though Bob.

 

You said (and I agree) “how is that a bad thing?” I would guess that there a lot of folks in India that would make the same argument about the assassinations on Canadian soil. 

 

But the guy they murdered here didn't do anything to hurt anyone.

[4petesake]

55 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

But the guy they murdered here didn't do anything to hurt anyone.

Once again we agree. The Indian government does not however. My point is that it’s all allowable as long as we get to decide who is a terrorist, who it’s ok to assassinate, who & when it’s fine to torture someone, etc. 

 

 

The Khalistan movement is outlawed in India and considered a national security threat by the government. A number of groups associated with the movement are listed as “terrorist organizations” under India’s Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

Nijjar’s name appears on the Home Ministry’s list of UAPA terrorists and in 2020, the Indian National Investigation Agency accused him of “trying to radicalize the Sikh community across the world in favor of the creation of ‘Khalistan,’” adding that he had been “trying to incite Sikhs to vote for secession, agitate against the government of India and carry out violent activities.”