LoveCanada

joined 1 week ago
[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 days ago (2 children)

A new generation starts when kids are born. Thats about 20 years if you average it across the world. Maybe 30 years in North America. Not 60 years.

I understand their situation very well. I used to have a home that was destroyed by a catastrophic natural event and I cant live there anymore because my home, cars and property are gone. Stuff happens. Im not looking for a scapegoat, you deal with it and move on, ESPECIALLY if its going to take 100 years to happen.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca -1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah wearing pants is exactly the same as taking a shot that MAY protect you from covid (It didnt. I still got covid, so did three people in my family who were also vaccinated) or it may actually make you sicker.

Which is why the gov has accepted admissions from 2700 Canadians who were damaged by the vaccine and have already paid out 18 million in damages to them with more to come. https://vaccineinjurysupport.ca/en/program-statistics

So yeah, thats exactly like wearing pants to work.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

She wasnt 'prone' to sickness til the hospital forced her to get a SARS shot after nearly 20 years there. Not her fault she got sick from it.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca -3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

Major historic polluters like Canada

Huh? Even the article states Canada's contribution to GHG's is 2% which is already inflated. Most sources state its 1.3%. How does 98.7% of emissions coming from other countries, with China and the US making up more than half of that, make Canada a "major" polluter? We're obviously and empirically very MINOR polluters, we're actually within the margin of error since the calculations are all based on computer models.

And Im well aware of Canada's higher per capita rate but the environment does not measure GHG's by "per capita" rate.

One of the main lawyers represented in this court case was there to represent Tuvalu, which is a tiny string of islands in the mid Pacific. Its a tiny nation of 10,000 people on 9 miniature islands (totalling only 10 square miles) with the highest point only being 15 feet above sea level. But these people feel that a tiny and incredibly slow rise in sea level due to "climate change" is their biggest danger? How about typhoons or just a plain old sea squall? The island MAY be underwater in 100 years. Maybe.

Here's an idea - since this is "emergency" is going to take a hundred years, which is five generations from now, you Tuvaluans start packing your bags and moving say in 20 or 30 years, instead of hand wringing what MIGHT happen in five generations? Heck, take your time, and dont move for three more generations, your kids, your grandkids and your great grandkids will be fine.

Good lord, like none of us have ever moved because we no longer felt good about where we lived or it was no longer a 'safe neighborhood' Happens every day in the rest of the world, why should Tuvalu get 'compensated' five generations down the road when they could easily make EXTREMELY SLOW plans to leave in a 20, 40, 60 years from now?

Thats like watching a car come at you at walking speed from 100 miles away and screaming that you are going to want compensation when it hits your great great great grandchildren who all refuse to move from the same spot. Make it make sense. Its not an emergency when it happens at a snails pace, its just a change.

The only people truly excited about this ruling are the lawyers rubbing their greedy hands in glee at the prospect of their fees for suing the big bad oil companies for billions.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca -2 points 4 days ago (3 children)

What about her employers obligation to protect HER? She was there for 30 years and she had already suffered physical damage from a previous vaccine that her employer required (SARS). To FORCE her to endanger herself further was illogical and unfair.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca -5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

If you are given options its a choice like 'hey we value your THIRTY YEARS of service so you can work on a different unit for now, or you can take an unpaid leave, or you can do administrative work at home til the epidemic subsides' THAT would be a choice.

If its 'You have to get the vaccine or we'll fire you', thats not a consequence, thats force' She was most definitely FORCED to resign.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca -1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

You're completely missing context.

At the point of the convoy, about 85% of Canadians were already vaccinated. Thats plenty for 'herd immunity' But the government was STILL pushing, after two solid years of vaccinations and people being isolated for even MORE measures to force people to get vaccinated. And the cracks were already beginning to show - kids were losing out on a significant amount of their education, old people in homes were suffering deep depression from not seeing family, businesses were closing and people were losing their life's work because they had no customers, mental health issues were skyrocketing and hospitals couldnt keep up with the patient intake, drug use went from bad to epidemic levels and still is epidemic level, family relationships were not only strained but a lot of people ended relationships with friends and family over the vaccination issue. And into this hell, Trudeau comes up with the bright idea to try and force cross border truckers to get vaccinated when they barely ever left their truck cabs and interacted with almost no one in their daily duties. Even Trudeau said "over 90% of truckers are vaccinated". Fine. Good enough, leave the rest alone.

You make it sound like those opposed to vaccines were the majority. No there were a minority who had reasons not to get it whether you agree with their reasons or not. And we should've been just fine with that, because they were a small minority. But instead of just leaving them alone MANY people vilified them as evil people and bad Canadians. They weren't.

I STRONGLY prefer a few people who chose to do what they felt was right for them and their families to a government that says you WILL do what we say, WHEN we tell you to do it and you will NOT object or we will make sure you suffer consequences including losing your job and your means to make a living AND we will seize your money for protesting what we tell you. Like, what the fuck Trudeau, back the hell up!! Who made you KING?! This is Canada, not communist China. He WAY overstepped his authority and thank god he paid for it with HIS job - the truckers are just fine.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca -2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I agree, we were working with the info at the time. But thats what was so frustrating about the continuation of the mandates when it was clear that we were past the peak of infections and the gov STILL wanted to impose NEW restrictions. I think Canadians were pretty patient for two long years but there was no reason to keep pushing us past the point of reason.

And even if Trudeau's rationale was that he wanted to push people to get vaccinated, the name calling and the derision for those who didnt want to was completely uncalled for. The FIRST job of a PM is to keep Canadians united and feeling supported not treated like they were bad guys. That was a jerk move on his part.

But yes, lesson learned. Unfortunately the 'lesson' here in Alberta seems to be 'you cant make us take a vaccine we dont want which is why we have a crazy high measles outbreak. Yikes. Thats embarrassing.

[–] LoveCanada@lemmy.ca -2 points 4 days ago

Thats a short term consequence and unfortunate for those people. But look at the long term consequence - America continues to lose credibility in the eyes of the world. Dumpster Donnie, while a hero to the party faithful, is increasingly despised and the American economy is paying the price as not just Canadians but other world citizens are avoiding US good and tourism. He thinks he's "winning" so bigly. He's only delaying his ouster.

view more: ‹ prev next ›