So it is. I was reading that as being applicable to the general public, not necessarily including the political class. That's what I read, though, not what was said.
jadero
joined 2 years ago
Been there, done that. Simply joining the political class is insufficient. I now work even earlier in the process: family, friends, acquaintances, and community groups.
You're right in that the solution is ultimately to change who belongs to the political class, but that requires a lot of organizing from outside the machine in order to develop the skills and programs and platforms.
I'm just disillusioned by the fact that too few people follow the science, understand the research, think logically, are willing to give new things an honest try, or show a modicum of decency.
While I don't disagree with the sentiment, there is more to duty to than showing up to vote. What about the duty of the political class to offer real alternatives and then pursue the realization of those alternatives? If the only choices are in the details of how we get screwed over, it's not exactly that big a deal whether we vote or not.
I think "small" is relative to the cost of legal assistance. That is, $50,000 might be not a financially viable suit to bring if you need a lawyer to examine and argue the finer points of law instead of just showing up with documentation and contracts.
No, it should happen at the national level for buying power. It should include the full supply chain as exploited by current national and multinational grocers.
So I guess what I'm saying, is pick one and nationalize the whole damn thing. Weston/Loblaws would be my pick.
Everyone in a position to complain about loss of wealth or income as a result of nationalization has enough of either or both to just ignore.
That sounds like the confectionary that stopped carrying a particular chocolate bar because they couldn't keep it stock. True story.
If they can't keep up to infractions, the solution is not to ignore infractions but to scale up. Or, in this case, put some traffic engineers on the case to see what's special about that stretch of road.
Don't remind me. I live in SK. We're not all wacky, but sometimes it feels that way.
They could add it to the actual labour code instead of making it standalone. Anything in the federal code becomes the baseline for provincial labour code. For example, every provincially regulated industry must provide at least 1/26 annual earnings as vacation pay, because it's not legal to write a provincial code that is "less than" the federal code. Provinces like SK have bumped that to 3/52 for their provincially regulated industries, but cannot choose to reduce it below 1/26.
I can't imagine there being that many jobs critical to public health and safety where there aren't already mechanisms in place to allow for low-risk job action. It's not like there is a glut of suitably trained people just waiting around to work as scabs.
So, yes, the only purpose of this exception is to allow companies to play games with strange and wondrous definitions of what constitutes "public health and safety".
One thing that the automatic summary missed is this important paragraph:
So both sides of the conflict have used the phrase as a way to dismiss the claims of the other, although it's origin is as a Palestinian slogan. According to this Wikipedia page, there have historically been multiple interpretations of exactly what is meant when using that phrase and those variations continue. In fact, as of this writing, neutrality of this article is disputed with the relevant talk page raising what could be conflicting concerns, most notably the issue of whether we take the meaning from the users' claims or from those holding opposing views.