• Introducing Image Options for ResetEra 2.0! Check the left side navigation bar to show or hide images, avatars, covers, and embedded media. More details at the link.
  • Community Spotlight sign-ups are open once again for both Gaming and EtcetEra Hangout threads! If you want to shine a spotlight on your community, please register now.

Canada PoliERA |OT| Two Years of Sunny Days? That’s Scheer Madness!

Oct 25, 2017
1,775
Canada
This sounds like a classic case of 'defund, discredit' used to undermine and destroy public services.

The solution to the 'transit is bad' is to fund transit more.

Vancouver is now seeing a virtuous cycle thanks to funding increases. Transit use is up 7% YoY with bus use leading the pack up 8%. More funding = more service, so more people use the service, which yields more service etc.
Considering that the drivers are the ones that are causing the negativity towards the service as I clearly outlined and service reductions cost the drivers their jobs but continue operating this way because they think the city would never DARE to reduce service, I don’t think you’re viewing the discussion from a good faith perspective by suggesting that it’s merely a “defund, discredit” situation. The lockout happened because the union, despite getting poor marks for service quality, wanted a 22% wage increase, whereas I thought the city was throwing good money after bad by giving them the 10% wage increase offered; you can’t reward shit performance.

And I’m not suggesting that they shouldn’t fund transit options, so I don’t know who you’re arguing with. Despite cratered ridership, Saskatoon is still funding expansion and I personally have faith that they can right the ship (despite that being contrary to consensus). But the point I’m making is that it has to be a smart investment in projects that increase ridership in numbers that justify continued expenditure.

Vancouver is not a great example to apply nationwide, because they already have the big infrastructure built that makes transit an incredibly viable and appealing option overall; if Vancouver’s entire network were buses, be assured that ridership wouldn’t be seeing these increases. When you look at the data for the 2018 review, Vancouver and Burnaby bus routes are what contribute to the ridership bump, while Richmond, North Vancouver, West Vancouver and Surrey (where the bulk of the city is bus service with limited to no SkyTrain) clearly lag behind (I didn’t count New Westminster because you can easily walk from the SkyTrain stops almost anywhere). Plus, driver reliability is not in question out there.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
767
BREAKING: Lynn Beyak has been suspended from the Senate for the remainder of this parliamentary session.

Good riddance to her. Too bad she wasn't permanently removed.
 
Oct 31, 2017
2,662
🇨🇦 🌎 🌌
It's good the Senate enacted the ethics committee recommendations regarding Beyak and that the letters will be taken down from the website.
Judging by her response it won't be long before she does something that gets her permanently removed.
 
Oct 25, 2017
249
Old people, disabled people, families need their car.

Fuck spandex bike nuts who exceed speed limits.

The solution is electrification.

Condo and appatment buildings need help to install plug stations

Oh, fuck bike nuts
This is like peak gutter_trash posting, it's almost satirical.
A bike is the most efficient means of transport, there's no way around it. You should be wishing for more bike nuts, every person who gets on a bike means less traffic for the people where a bike isn't an option.

Also, I can't even imagine what's wrong with your head to complain about BIKES exceeding speed limits? Is your city full of Tour de France pros? Nobody on a bike is exceeding the speed limit, I guarantee it.

You really are ContraWars, but in a mirror. He might actually be more reasonable than you.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,388
110 km/h coming to 3 Ontario highways starting September

Yurek said the following highways will be part of the pilot project starting in mid-September:

Highway 402 from London to Sarnia.
The Queen Elizabeth Way (QEW) from St. Catharines to Hamilton.
Highway 417 from Ottawa/Gloucester to Ontario/Quebec border.

The province is also looking for a suitable highway to pilot higher speeds in Northern Ontario.
 
Oct 25, 2017
892
The BC Liberals did this with 120km/h speeds on some highways and as one would expect it was an extremely bad idea, but vroom vroom gotta go fast appease those car drivers.

New research from doctors and engineers at the University of B.C. suggests the number of fatal crashes has doubled on highways where the speed limit has been hiked in recent years.

The study, published in the journal Sustainability, looked at crash and insurance claim data from the 1,300-kilometre stretches of highway where the speed limit was raised to 120 kilometres per hour in 2014.

It suggests the number of fatal crashes jumped by 118 per cent, injury claims with ICBC rose by 30 per cent and total insurance claims went up by 43 per cent.

...
 
Nov 6, 2017
493
Canada
Roads need to be designed for the higher speeds. You can’t take a shitty ass Canadian road and just slap a 120km sign on it and call it a day.

(Also why in general is Canada so terrible at building infrastructure like roads and stuff, trans Canada highway is embarrassing)
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,388
Ontario 400-series highways have a design speed of 130 km/h. It's probably why literally everyone speeds, as people will drive as fast as feels safe. The speed limit should be brought closer to the speed that the road pushes people to drive at and then actually be enforced.

I don't really agree that Ontario is bad at building highways.


 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
2,375
Toronto
(Also why in general is Canada so terrible at building infrastructure like roads and stuff, trans Canada highway is embarrassing)
Because here in Canada we follow the American model of Civilization development of lowest bidder wins. Which basically means that construction crews would get funding for and build the roads out of fucking cardboard if they were allowed to.

Goverment must ways pick the cheaper option. And the cheaper option is always spending 2B every year to repair the roads instead of 5B to do it right and only need to do it every 5 years. The companies know this, they also know there are no consequences for them. So they use heaped materials and have things take way longer because the government will always pay up.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,022
A lot of road construction woes tie into how knee capped cities are when it comes to generating revenue. The main road leading to my neighbourhood was single lane 7 years ago, double lane 3 years ago and is now triple. It was always planned to be 3 lanes and they left the space for it, but half the road gets ripped to shreds every time they expand. Yet there’s never enough money to just to it fully the first time around.

People just buy into the right wing propaganda that government budgets are like household budgets and must be balanced while ignoring that households don’t have thousands/millions of earners to fall back on the way governments do.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,375
Toronto
On topic with Public Transit.
Yesterday Trudeau and nationalust premier Legault had disagreements on the topic

Provinces are the problem
Doug Ford here in Ontario went into the media and straight up said they refused to cooperate with the Federal Government on Infrastructure funding unless things were on their terms. To the point that Trudeau had to call Ontario out to give them projects to put the money towards
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,375
Toronto
Why did Trudeau backtrack on it again"?
Something something PR would mean the end of Canadian society, something about extremists would win seats under a PR system, something else on Trudeau wanting Ranked Ballots. Something about how it would polarize the electorate, political parties and be dangerous to canadian society. (~paraphrased out of the mouth of Trudeau from various town halls and interviews)

There may have also been some claims that the committee didn't do what they were supposed to do in giving them a single system to switch to, and that there wasn't any consensus. Despite the fact that they never asked the committee for a single recommendation, the committee went above and beyond to give them several PR based systems, plus rules they had to follow if they wanted to make their own, and that the committee was united in wanting change with the holdups being around referendum/no referendum. This evolving into lack of engagement and amongst the citizens not meeting an unstated threshold of feedback
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,022
Funny. New Zealand doesn’t seem to be living in some Mad Max hellhole thanks to PR. Although I would have preferred ranked ballots to the flaming piece of shit known as FPTP.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,375
Toronto
Yep. If the committee recommended STV like he wanted that shit would've been pushed through so fast.
The committee did recommend STV! STV was one of the 3 systems they pointed out and recommended. They just recommended the Proportional -multi-person district- version of it instead of the purely ranked single-person version Trudeau wanted (IRV/AV)
 
Last edited:

Fuzzy

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
5,337
Toronto, Canada
The committee did recommend STV! STV was one of the 3 systems they pointed out and recommended. They just recommended the Proportional, multi-person district, Version of it instead of the purely ranked single-person version Trudeau wanted (IRV/AV)
That's what I meant. He wanted the one version that he thought would benefit the LPC and everything else was "dangerous".
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,273
Funny. New Zealand doesn’t seem to be living in some Mad Max hellhole thanks to PR. Although I would have preferred ranked ballots to the flaming piece of shit known as FPTP.
They are used to win a majority government with 35% of the votes. Their campaigns are all tailored around this objective to attain. They are not ready to campaign with a STV w/ ranked ballotsystem. Demonizing your opponent can be costly as you really want your party to be the second pick in a worst case scenario. It also pushed people towards voting for the party they want and it can help split the votes on the "left".

They are probably terrified because you can vote green or NDP before them on the ranked ballots. You don't have this problem with the "right" as Maxim Bernier is pretty much statistical noise so far.
 
Oct 25, 2017
892
On the topic of Cities needing a new funding model:

I don't have a link for it but I read an article the other day about city infrastructure that mentioned how Edmonton (and presumably Calgary) were concerned about the future of some of their projects under Kenny. The core problem is that I suppose Alberta's carbon tax wasn't wholly revenue neutral and there was some funds diverted to infrastructure projects that would lower emissions (eg. public transit). If Kenny ends the carbon tax then one presumes that the Fed government would step back in a carbon tax, but it would be revenue neutral, with money coming back to residents via rebate cheques. Any projects that relied on carbon tax revenue are in limbo.

Watching the Metro Vancouver Three phase '10 Year Mayors Transit Plan' slowly struggle to get started over the last 4 years has convinced me how badly we need to find a way to get cities more of a larger, stable revenue stream.

For phase one, the smallest portion, you gotta give the Fed Liberals credit for stepping in with 50% (!!) of a share to kick start that thing, which was such a good deal that even the transit skeptic BC Liberals signed onto that.

With the much larger multi-billion phase two however, it struggled in limbo because the cities didn't have enough money to fund their side, because neither the feds or province would fund more. Only when the NDP got elected and raised their share from 33% to 40% did the math work out.

What we really need is to find a way for cities to generate this money themselves instead of begging hat in hand to the provinces and feds. On housing it's the same thing. Vancouver has been in the midst of a housing crisis since the last federal election, and yet of course they can't simply build their own public housing even though they have the land. They don't in any way have the money. Instead their waiting hat in hand, hoping that the Liberals get elected again so perhaps that money will flow their way, and hoping that there's also coincidentally a provincial government with the same ideals in place that doesn't obstruct things.

I don't know what it looks like. Gas tax, road pricing, sales tax? I know things need to change though.

In other news, the NDP look to be shoring up their green credit after the Green Party Byelection win by motioning for the government to declare a climate emergency (Ireland just did this, and so has the City of Vancouver).

OTTAWA—NDP leader Jagmeet Singh says his party will cut Canada’s emissions almost in half over the next decade as he tries to stake out a claim to the climate change agenda in the looming federal election.

The pledge is one contained in an NDP motion expected today in the House of Commons that will lay out eight broad strokes of the NDP’s climate change platform. The motion asks for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to declare “an environment and climate emergency” as well as pledge to cut emissions more deeply, eliminate government aid to the fossil fuel industry and cancel the planned expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline.
...
Asking for TMX to get cancelled means this is DOA, but I guess they'll use the rejection for rhetorical and fund raising purposes.

I do like the sound of we need to declare a "climate emergency" more than we need a "Green New Deal."
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,022
“We ask that the PM commit to disposing of the billions of dollars spent on TMX. Don’t flush them down the toilet; we don’t want plastic in the ocean. Don’t burn it; we don’t want more carbon in the atmosphere. Just deface it so it may not be used as legal tender.”

Sounds good Jagmeet.
 
Oct 25, 2017
892
Not really a lot of daylight between the Fed Greens and Fed NDP position here?


Singh states multiple times that they do not support fracking, which would essentially mean that there's no difference between Green and NDP environmental policy (!), but then again he's also fuzzy in this clip in that he says he'd support projects that meet environmental goals, which sort of opens the door to doing an LNG project if the greater environmental goals can still be reached. This latter stance is what the BC NDP have been asserting and not that far off what Trudeau is at, where he asserts that he can do a pipeline because he's also adding a carbon tax.
 
Nov 6, 2017
493
Canada
So the dumb fuck conservatives in Alberta are slashing the corporate tax rate to 8%

Fucking corporate welfare trickledown economics bullshit.

The citizens are too stupid as well to realize that it’s them that have to make up the shortfall.

Can’t wait to leave this shithole province.
 
Nov 4, 2017
959
Saskatchewanexit!

Survey suggests Sask. residents want Western Canada to separate

A recent survey suggests Saskatchewan residents think Western Canada would be better off if it separates from the rest of the nation.

The Environics Institute polled 5,732 people online, across all Canadian provinces and territories, from December 2018 to January 2019.

In Saskatchewan, 53 per cent of respondents agreed with the statement, "Western Canada gets so few benefits from being part of Canada that they might as well go it on their own."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sask...nts-want-western-canada-to-separate-1.5132270

Let's balkanize this shit!
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,022
Saskatchewan trying to out-stupid Alberta. Bold strategy. BC wants none of our shit and MB is broke4lyfe and knows Ottawa is the hand that feeds.

So yeah... Alberchewan will be an amazing country.