RangerRay
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 5,328
- Points
- 1,260
I’ve been saying for a while now that just because you’re a businessman doesn’t mean you’re a capitalist.
Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???
- Thread starter Altair
- Start date
I’ve been saying for a while now that just because you’re a businessman doesn’t mean you’re a capitalist.
Feds order Chinese tech firm to close Canadian operations over national security
The federal government is ordering a Chinese maker of surveillance camera systems to shutter its Canadian business and leave the country over national security concerns.
www.ctvnews.ca
New gvt now taking a few things more seriously.
That's an interesting one. I haven't seen any background on this, but I could see why a Chinese manufacturer of surveillance cameras that use the internet for data could be a problem. While you and I will never know, it would be fun to know what specific intelligence informed the Investment Canada Act review that resulted in this national security determination.Feds order Chinese tech firm to close Canadian operations over national security
The federal government is ordering a Chinese maker of surveillance camera systems to shutter its Canadian business and leave the country over national security concerns.
New gvt now taking a few things more seriously.
- Reaction score
- 10,287
- Points
- 1,160
HavokFour
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 932
- Points
- 810
In the early 2000's you could just put a make/model number of a lot of different types cameras into Google and it would bring up pages upon pages of privately owned ones that make you could view, and in some cases control entirely unknown to the owners and that existed for years. So this move makes a lot of sense in my mind. Better safe than sorry.
- Reaction score
- 6,214
- Points
- 1,260
Just like there’s different flavours or socialism, as @Kirkhill pointed out, there’s more than one flavour of capitalism/free market approaches.
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 5,140
- Points
- 1,210
My issue with the housing market is when you look at it, the homes them selves haven't increased a crazy amount over the last 20-30 years. What's primarily inflated in the value of the land those homes sit on. Thats how we end up with 1.3 million dollar slum homes for sale. Its 1.1 million for the land with a 200k shack on it. So truly its land values that need to be reassessed in how we value land to bring down those prices.
rmc_wannabe
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 9,170
- Points
- 1,310
The problem with land is that it is a finite resource. The amount we have that is desirable and available has been shrinking more and move over the past 50 or so years.
Scarcity = value. We aren't creating more desirable and available land due to stuff like the Greenbelt or other environmental things we know aren't the done thing anymore (Ducks Unlimited would have you hung drawn and quartered for suggesting draining a marsh to build a subdivision).
Until we reassess value on density, the problem will just get worse.
I’m only really familiar with the Ottawa market. That exists here where I live but only in specific desirable locations in and around the city.
Anyone familiar with Alta Vista for example will know that is the case. Some lots with older smaller homes which essentially become tear downs and new bigger houses built on them. Some other areas are similar. But there are more affordable options especially for people starting out.
Maybe land value assessments are the way to go or have more options elsewhere.
it isn't only the land value. Local governments consider new construction as a cash cow. Development fees from what I have read are in the hundreds of thousands of dollars in most of the major cities. It appears to be convenient to blame the developer but those houses that are mostly torn down but leave enough to label it a re-build save the builder a bundle in taxes.
- Reaction score
- 6,214
- Points
- 1,260
Signs of hope?
www.thecanadianpressnews.ca
We'll see how the "fresh look" goes, then. Also on the DoJ front ...
www.thecanadianpressnews.ca
Liberals taking ‘fresh’ look at online harms bill, justice minister says
OTTAWA - Justice Minister Sean Fraser says the federal government plans to take a "fresh" look at its online harms legislation over the summer but it's not clear yet exactly
New laws against blocking access to places of worship, schools coming, Fraser says
OTTAWA - Justice Minister Sean Fraser says the Liberal government will press ahead with plans for new criminal provisions against blocking access to places of worship, schools and community centres.
Eaglelord17
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,572
- Points
- 1,040
We don’t need new laws, only to enforce the laws on the books. It does cover all protests that block roads or any other place your legally allowed to be. Basically your right to protest doesn’t equal the right to prevent me from legally doing what I am allowed to do.Signs of hope?
We'll see how the "fresh look" goes, then. Also on the DoJ front ...Liberals taking ‘fresh’ look at online harms bill, justice minister says
OTTAWA - Justice Minister Sean Fraser says the federal government plans to take a "fresh" look at its online harms legislation over the summer but it's not clear yet exactly
New laws against blocking access to places of worship, schools coming, Fraser says
OTTAWA - Justice Minister Sean Fraser says the Liberal government will press ahead with plans for new criminal provisions against blocking access to places of worship, schools and community centres.
But by setting it apart he provides an excuse for the government to do nothing about it now. So we will have another summer of vandalized synagogues and burnt catholic churches while they study it.We don’t need new laws, only to enforce the laws on the books. It does cover all protests that block roads or any other place your legally allowed to be. Basically your right to protest doesn’t equal the right to prevent me from legally doing what I am allowed to do.
Signs of hope?
We'll see how the "fresh look" goes, then. Also on the DoJ front ...Liberals taking ‘fresh’ look at online harms bill, justice minister says
OTTAWA - Justice Minister Sean Fraser says the federal government plans to take a "fresh" look at its online harms legislation over the summer but it's not clear yet exactly
New laws against blocking access to places of worship, schools coming, Fraser says
OTTAWA - Justice Minister Sean Fraser says the Liberal government will press ahead with plans for new criminal provisions against blocking access to places of worship, schools and community centres.
We don’t need new laws, only to enforce the laws on the books. It does cover all protests that block roads or any other place your legally allowed to be. Basically your right to protest doesn’t equal the right to prevent me from legally doing what I am allowed to do.
I’d need to be able to actually read a bill with proposed wording for any new offence, and compare it to existing criminal offences like Intimidation and Mischief. I’m not sure there’s much problem behaviour that’s not already incidentally captured by existing offences. However, the federal government has zero ability to actually operationally direct police services. Enumerating a new and more specific offence would be a way of signaling Parliament’s intent that specific behaviour with specific motive is specifically criminalized, lest police and prosecutors be reticent to apply existing offences in unconventional situations because it feels like a stretch.
My best guess is we would see a new offence numbered 423.3, mirroring the 423.2 “Intimidation - health services” and “Obstruction or interference with access” offence created in 2021. That offence, in the context of protecting healthcare providers and facilities, both captures ‘intimidation’ more expansively but also plainly and directly criminalizes the impeding of access. the 423.2 offence was created in response to protests during the pandemic that impeded access to hospital, vaccination clinics etc. existing offences were, I guess, found to fall a bit short of need. A new offence that mirrors the ‘health services’ offences but substitutes something like ‘religious or cultural institutions or facilities’ is my best guess for what they’re considering.
- Reaction score
- 1,826
- Points
- 1,260
Also, may not hurt to know, in advance, what your current, and potential future, employer(s) is willing to tolerate regarding "Professional Conduct off-duty".
- Reaction score
- 33,749
- Points
- 1,090
One challenge is that many religious facilities also lease out space to other groups. If a Church of the FSM (bless his noodly appendages) rents out space to an unrelated group, if I protest that unrelated group, would I be subject to additional sanction because they rented space in a church instead of in an industrial park?
E.g., someone decides to raucously protest the Scouts troop that operates out of the basement of the church. That’s the sort of detail in which the devil is found- but it can also be adequately worded to avoid. Laws aren’t written by legislators, they’re written by Department of Justice lawyers who generally are pretty good at statutory interpretation in order to avoid unintentional capture of behaviour that isn’t intended to be covered. Not that they bat a thousand, but they’re pretty good.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,147
- Points
- 1,010
Valuable points. I like to add to it, some observations.
-My wife found some properties (1/8 to 1/3 acre size) that were selling for DIRT cheap ($180-$300,000) within 5 hours of where we live. They aren't selling. Why? All three properties have dilapidated and run down houses (one of these properties the house is barely standing after a fire), they are near NOWHERE (some people like the quiet of the backwoods but yeah, maybe a limit to most), proximity to towns, schools, police, fire, hospitals becomes a factor as well. Its not necessarily the land that is valuable. An empty 1/4 acre lot is worth so much, build a beautiful 4 bed room excellent house and suddenly its value sky rocket. Assuming the location is reasonable.
-Within Canada, although there is lots and lots of land, not very much of it can be developed. If you want to build whole new communities in far northern areas you run into challenges such as establishing physical infrastructure (Roads, sewers, bridges, etc), economic conditions (no one is going to commute 12 hours for a job), social infrastructure (schools, hospitals, police, etc) and ENERGY sources (for electricity production) which basically means coal or nuclear or gas, lets face the facts Solar and windmills are pipedream failures.
This really stupid Liberal failure DOESN'T work. I would go so far as saying immigration needs to be choked right off altogether (or no more than say 50,000 immigrants qualify only), NO MORE refugees or asylum seekers (too bad, tough kitty) and halt foreign students, zippo, nadda. I realize they dump a bunch of foreign cash into Canada (a good thing) but housing is beyond a royal mess. As well doctors available, crime rates, etc.
I am waiting for some Liberal heads to explode or explain away how everything is not the Liberals fault or its "just not understood"
Bottom line, we do have finite amount of land, end story. People becoming adults or arriving here need jobs (and lets face it, government jobs are maxed out, and beyond). We need to stop half assing these natural resource production/extraction/refining and go ALL IN. That means Uncle Mark has to back stab a few of the old Trudeau crowd sooner rather than later. Bill C5, with Conservative cooperation gave Uncle Mark a big gift (He doesn't have to repeal Bill C69 and embarrass the Liberals but he can still get things done in "national interest")
This all requires a holistic approach to governance (I swear our federal government still operates in isolated silos with each ministry).
- Reaction score
- 10,287
- Points
- 1,160
Related issue is that the developers won't permit a modest home on a high value piece of land.
My wife and a found a lot in a subdivision with a marvelous view and a degree of isolation. We wanted to build a modest 3 bedroom bungalow on it. It was disallowed by the developer. He wouldn't make as much from building the home we wanted as he would building the 3 storey castle he wanted to sell.
rmc_wannabe
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 9,170
- Points
- 1,310
Agree with all of those points.
Somewhat agree. Our population growth and sustainability is fed by immigration, not by birth rate. Indid my bit by having 4 kids of my own, my peers and upcoming generations have no intention of doing the same.
Those jobs and industries need workers, and they aren't being regenerated by the current Canadian population.
Not a liberal or a conservative, per se, by I agree it was a terrible policy move; mainly because it brought the people here before the infrastructure was in place. If you build it, they will come however, trying to build it while they're on top of you is twice the ass pain.
I say this as someone who built CPs for most of my career.
I think the writing is on the wall that PMMC is cut from the same cloth as St. Laurent, Martin, and Pearson; less from the Chretien, Trudeau, and Trudeau kind.
Getting on with it and doing the things needed to build prosperity for all, vice mandating propserity through policy.
Bingo.
Similar threads
