✓ Okay, boomer.

Throwing a dart at that poster and letting that determine your fate, right?

Yup, but politicians are always trying to play the game. They probably have some internal metric causing them to believe that making a show of looking into this might win them a few voters while retaining their base. Maybe they’re right, but I still don’t like it. Either way they’ll have my vote as they’re the only non-Conservative party with even a remote possibility of winning my riding. (Plus I’ve sworn off the Liberals for a good while after their broken promise on electoral reform.)

The legislation doesn’t specify how websites should verify a user’s age, but options include establishing a digital ID system or services that can estimate an individual’s age based on a visual scan of their face.

Yeah, that’s a greeeeat idea. People will obviously be totally on board with their computer taking their picture while they’re gearing up to do that.

Regardless, all laws like this do are sell VPN subscriptions or push people to the real shady sites. As a consistent NDP voter (not that my vote matters in my Conservative riding) I sincerely hope they’re making a show of reviewing this bill before dismissing it. We saw what happens when the NDP tries to move right of the Liberals under Mulcair - it’s a bad move.

Type K looks the happiest.

This is a good thing which I guarantee the Conservatives will undo next time they get into power (probably next election).

Probably not in that dude’s queen bed (unless y’all are into that).

I don’t know how but I do know that those are indeed some fierce eyebrows in that picture.

Oh, absolutely. It’s all but inevitable and we’re not exactly spoiled for good options in our oligopoly-friendly country, but at least for the moment they’re not Loblaws/Walmart.

Now that you mention it, I seem to recall reading something similar a few years back. I still think they’ll inevitably break bad though - all it will take is some board and/or leadership turnover. We can at least enjoy the ride (and cheap hotdogs) in the meantime.

I fundamentally agree with you that publicly-traded corporations are inherently problematic due to the nature of their fiduciary duty to shareholders. That said, I think Costco is clearly the lesser of these particular evils. I have no doubt that given time they’ll turn to shit, but thus far (to my understanding) they at least pay something resembling a living wage and have reasonably consumer-friendly policies.

Shopping local could (if even possible) be the more ethical option, but most people are struggling and small grocers simply don’t have the margins to generally be affordable. I’m betting very few of them are able to pay their employees anything close to Costco either (if they even care to - plenty of small business owners are greedy in their own right).

Now if only I didn’t have a panic attack every time I set foot in a Costco …

I generally avoid even watching a 30 second video link, but I’m not even an American and ended up watching all 45 minutes of this. That was a great talk - thanks for sharing it.

Also, if you’re a dentist by trade you’d be better off as a prostitute. (Literally as per the article.)

This is my favorite brand new sentence.

Now this is an advanced take on, “Nobody wants to work.” Amaze yourself at the extreme feats of mental gymnastics! Marvel at the sheer audacity of these bold pioneers of industry!

Absolutely!

God these people are such fucking crybabies. It’s not even an especially significant tax hike.

Edited to add:

“Foundations, high-net worth folks that are holding the capital into companies — that’s going to be gone.”

That’s a lie, but if it were true - good riddance. We’d get a lot more done as a country without those ghouls playing the working class against each other. Let them all move away - it’s not like regular Canadians won’t start businesses to take their place.

Also, when I say it’s not an especially significant tax hike: Capital gains are currently taxed as if you made 50% of the profit you actually made, and now that’s going up to 66%. It’s not a tax rate of 66%, it literally means “When we tax you, we’ll pretend you only made 2/3rds of the profit you actually did.” Regular people, already get taxed on 100% of their employment income (albeit generally in a lower tax bracket).

Much appreciated! I get fired up by this sort of thing, and it’s nice to know I’m not alone. Too often it feels that way with the direction our species seems to be heading.

But some businesses said the approach could worsen what the Bank of Canada’s No. 2 official last month called a productivity “emergency.” Canada numbers rate poorly thanks to weak investment in machinery, equipment and intellectual property, the bank’s senior deputy governor Carolyn Rogers said.

What a crock of shit. Want a good way to avoid paying taxes as a business? Reinvest profits back into the business via purchases of equipment (ok, you have to amortize that one over a few years), higher wages, more staff, R&D, etc. More money reinvested into these productivity-generating purchases (that are apparently in a state of emergency) means less you’re extracting from the business, and therefore less you’re paying via this new slightly-higher capital gains tax.

Want a cool side-benefit? This actual spending (rather than wealth-extraction and subsequent hoarding) will generate real economic activity which will have a compounding effect on the economy resulting in actual economic growth. The taxes generated by those who decide not to reinvest more of their profits will have a similar effect, with that added government spending stimulating the economy in its own way.

Capitalism has many faults, but while we’ve got it we could at least adhere to one of its pretty fundamental tenets that money needs to flow through the economy for it to work. Hoard too much wealth and the gears dry up, resulting in an economic downturn.

Henry Ford - despite being a total piece of shit in his own right - at least recognized the need for his workers to be able to afford to buy the product they built. Too many modern “titans of industry” seem to be forgetting that.

Source: I’m not an economist, but I do manage the finances for a small Canadian business of about 25 employees. We don’t give a shit about becoming rich - we just want to keep the lights on, live in reasonable (but not excess) comfort, pay our employees as well as our funds allow, and enable my mom (our company president) to be able to one day retire.I live in constant fear of a deep recession that I think is inevitable, but believe that actions like these new higher taxes on the rich will help stave off or mitigate. In my opinion we need much higher taxes on substantial wealth but in the meantime I’ll take this as progress.

I definitely get the point, and would never do that to someone. Buuuuut … I think I’d personally prefer to be laid off by email simply because if it’s happening they’ve already made up their mind and it’s not like I can talk them out of it. Plus, I wouldn’t have an audience and thus wouldn’t feel the need to pretend not to be super bummed out (or relieved if I hated the job).

Obviously you never know how someone would like to be laid off though, so it’s best to err on following the traditional path. Or if you wanna be insane you could start dropping hints. “Say, Fred, how would you prefer to be laid off? Hypothetically speaking.”