Canada's digital nomad remote work scheme

"Canuckistan"? Hm.

One thing to keep in mind is that Canada is a vast landscape with fewer residents than California. The U.S. is gigantic by any measure. Even our senseless violence is decentralized.

 

Oh, I'm no Bernie Bro but I do believe in Medicare for All.

 

There's a nursing crisis in Ontario too, and no wonder. Nurses' wage increases were capped, by Doug Ford's Conservative government, at 1% per year for several years, in a time of inflation. The capping was ruled to be unconstitutional - yet the Ford government appealed it. The appeal is yet to be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada, but the nurses were awarded the additional money through arbitration. Story here: https://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-hospital-nurses-awarded-additional-pay-after-bill-124-struck-down-1.6375808

Teachers were handed the same deal - a cap at 1% annually for several years - but as far as I know, they have to await the Supreme Court of Canada's decision. Many of our "crises" in Canada are the products of our own governments, be they provincial, federal or municipal. Ford is a dropout, himself - first year of Community College. Perhaps that's why he hates teachers. I haven't a clue why he "punishes" nurses.

 

True - but we have some gigantic problems. The Province of Ontario has more government debt than any other entity on earth, except for sovereign nations. With a population of 14.5 million, our Provincial Government has managed to owe more than the State of California. It's a mess.

 

I love this place, but you're absolutely right. That is a "canard" for sure. "Un canard mort," a dead duck.

 

I'm a borderline PUMA and despise the self-righteous schmuck. He's not wrong on M4A, though.

 

Right, I don't believe Bernie's wrong on that, either. Do you think he was wrong on this, or not?
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/28/politics/bernie-sanders-canada-cheaper-insulin-cnntv/index.html

 

PUMA?

 

Originally "Party Union - My Ass." Here: https://psuvanguard.com/the-return-of-the-puma-opposition-to-sanders-creates-opportunities-for-trump/ Morphed into "People United Means Action." I liked the original better. Hey! This is your S.O.B. (South of Border) politics. Go 'way! I'm too busy, slagging Fat Dougie's "Ford Nation" and with the forthcoming August-long Boycott of all Loblaws-owned grocery, drug and Superstore markets, for consumer price-gouging. Gonna be a long, hot August.... but I'm gonna enjoy it. Oh YEAH!

 

"Dang! Got my bifocals, my cap and my picket sign -- but where did I put that AR-15? Oh yeah - it's in my third-best guitar case....Memory's a little shaky these past few months -- should get that looked at..."

 

okay then

 

Biden capped insulin prices for Medicare patients and successfully bullied pharma companies to lower the price for everyone else. I think the man deserves reelection for this alone. Of course, Bernie, and everyone else not oblivious or corrupt, was right about that.

Like many HRC supporters, I find myself in a curious position of despising Bernie while agreeing with like 80% of his policy positions. His politics style, and even more so, his groupies' politics style, is another matter entirely. The homeys friggin' cancelled Warren for daring to publicly question the mechanics of eventually delivering M4A, and routinely have online debates with topics like "is AOC a sellout?". Kind of made Bernie my least-favorite Democratic candidate save for Gabbard (and now, RFK Jr.). In short, Bernie's a schmuck, which doesn't necessarily mean that he's wrong.

 

Yep. He did. I just read about it here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/03/16/statement-from-president-joe-biden-on-top-three-insulin-producers-lowering-prices/

Good job, Mr. Biden. About time. And as far as Bernie goes, I can understand why people say "well, he may be right on this-or-that, but I sure don't like him."

 

I've long had a strong dislike for cranky old men - especially since I've had to deal with one in the mirror. Now, THAT guy is a real P.I.T.A!

 

The issue a lot of Bernie supporters had with Warren was that she was a Republican until she was 50. Then she switches sides, copies Bernie's platform, and says she can do it better than he could. She claimed in a debate, without proof, that he told her a woman could never be President (even though he's been on record since the 80s saying the opposite.) Warren couldn't even win her own state. Bernie was the best chance we had at a progressive President.

I can't speak to the "is AOC a sellout" debates, but Bernie has been on the right side of most of the issues that took other candidates decades to figure out. He was arrested marching for civil rights in 1963. He supported the first Burlington VT Gay Pride Parade in 1983 as Mayor of Burlington. He authored the first Medicare For All bill in 1993. He voted against the resolution authorizing the War in Iraq in 2002. He's also held positions strongly that I disagree with or don't know enough about to judge (e.g. he's against NAFTA, against government funding of nuclear power, etc.) He's nothing if not consistent.

 

This right here. This is the discourse I find distasteful in the Bernie crowd.

She didn't say he said a woman could never be President. She said he told her a woman can't win 2020 election. Which is, you know, not inconsistent with saying a woman can be President in abstract since the 80ies. I have no reason to doubt he said something to this effect to her; that would track with a Bernie crowd delusion that he's a more electable candidate.

Oh, and changing one's mind as a result of doing empirical research is not a fudging negative. As a matter of fact, one argument Warren can do progressive change better than Bernie can is the fact that she was instrumental in creating the CFPB before even getting elected, while Bernie... well, I guess, got photographed marching in support of all the right things.

See, this is the more fundamental thing, a mentality that it is more important to be right about stuff than to get stuff done. Bernie has the same exact record in getting health coverage to people (both had a hand in passing Obamacare). Yet he ran pounding everyone, Biden included, on healthcare issue, on the basis of being "right" and "consistent". It's one-sided to the point of being dishonest. Another example: in his book, he actually gives credit to the Clintons for trying to make healthcare a right for Americans. He also admits he didn't support Hillarycare ("because it was too complex" to his taste). Yet both he and his groupies destroyed Hilary when she dared to mention it. Waving a wildly out-of-context picture where they shared a stage once ("literally right behind you"). I mean, ffs.
Yay, Bernie's positions. Meh, Bernie.

 

It's a he-said, she-said that directly contradicts his statements outside of this alleged private statement and his support of Clinton in 2016 (who, he notes, got 3 million more votes), and came when they were neck and neck in the polls. It backfired.

I highly doubt she made it through undergrad, law school, and a professorship at Harvard Law before ever doing the slightest bit of research on how Republicanism harms people. Your party position is a choice. She had decades to make hers and she doesn't get any points for finally deciding people's lives are worth something.

Of course, that ignores that Bernie Sanders was a major supporter of the bill that created the CFPB and added an amendment that significantly increased transparency in the aftermath of the financial crisis.

Bernie gets plenty done. And in the healthcare case specifically he did everything he could to get a public option into Obamacare. He's been consistent about wanting single payer. Joe Liberman refused to support the bill with public option or single payer and without it or Bernie's vote, it wouldn't pass at all, so Bernie backed down, public option was removed and a neutered Obamacare passed. That's a very different scenario than Warren saying in 2012 that single payer was "politically unacceptable" and then changing her mind 4 years later.

I don't think we're going to agree here, but people have plenty of reasons to dislike Elizabeth Warren that are rooted in her politics. This isn't the political forum so I shouldn't keep going.

 

As I think about it more, this is also a ridiculous minimization of the dangers of marching for Black civil rights in 1963. The KKK was busy bombing churches and plenty of people were getting murdered for their support. I can't imagine collapsing the enormity of being open about that support as a white man in the early 60s into a photo op.

This thread has run its course for me.

 

...but you are freely collapsing moral purity and executive competence. As do virtually everyone in the Bernieland.

 

Yes, we HRC supporters remember Bernie's support of Clinton in 2016 very well. Especially "Wall Street speeches" saga.

This is a master class on "how to alienate people and lose votes".

Yes. The bill passed, which by definition means it had hundreds of supporters in Congress. Sanders is not Sinema, he is mostly on the right side of votes. With a small handful of exceptions.

Bernie (to his credit! this is a true positive thing in his record!) recognized that what he wants doesn't have votes and voted for a watered down compromise (because this way at least some people will get help). Maybe he even regrets his position on Hilarycare. And yet somehow this is "a very different scenario than Warren saying in 2012 that single payer was "politically unacceptable". "Politically unacceptable " literally means "there are not enough votes" for it.

There are plenty of reasons to dislike any politician (eg. Biden and his role in Thomas hearings, or the crime bill). It doesn't mean it is wise for people who are ostensibly progressive to pile on to the second most progressive Senator. Just one example. Funny thing is, even Bernie eventually got it. His groupies, not so much.