Nothing cracks me up more than people thinking that they even need to update these acts to do the things everyone is worried about. Not withstanding clause anyone? Can literally strip you of every "right" you think you have and all property you think you own.

Is surveillance the problem? You are surveilled daily and legally because you said "I accept" to more terms and conditions than a Lawyer would be willing to read. This doesn't include the free information you are putting on the internet daily, which is more valuable than a well placed operative long term. Then we can talk about Government agencies, which are all of them, intercepting whatever they can get. Which is again legal because you agreed to that in order to have your phone connected to the towers, and your computers connected to the internet.

"Among the controversial provisions are section 20 (1) “Every person commits an offence who, at the direction of, for the benefit of or in association with, a foreign entity or a terrorist group, induces or attempts to induce, by intimidation, threat or violence, any person to do anything or to cause anything to be done (a) that is for the purpose of increasing the capacity of a foreign entity or a terrorist group to harm Canadian interests; or (b) that is reasonably likely to harm Canadian interests.”

What is controversial about not assisting foreign entities through acts of violence and intimidation and making that a law?

If your "legitimate dissent" involves acting with, and for, foreign entities of any kind you can kindly get fucked and go set up shop in their country. You are either a useful idiot or a bad actor and Canada needs no more of either thanks.

“Are 13 year olds too young to exploit monetarily?”

Is 13 too young to work? A Saskatchewan proposal has reignited debate around kids and labour

Was it hard to quote the actual headline or is it a matter of making the narrative you are attempting to push stronger?

Reading the article helps as well.

CBC didn't post this article to lemmy, OP did. If you care so damn much about tent cities, the homeless, and the struggles of the lower class how about you take initiative and post the articles yourself?

People are struggling, and one last time for you and your lack of empathy, One shouldn’t have to hit the bottom to be heard.

When one refuses to speak, the other is forced to make assumptions. Frankly, I don't care if you say I am wrong. I can read, I have heard these words from others, and know who I am dealing with.

I would bet 3:1 that you have nothing serious in your past that you could prove to me. I would bet 100:1 that I could not prove my bullshit life to you and I lived it. Get the point?

I don't think you will, so the point is, you attacked a person for being a bad example because they are struggling and not at rock bottom because people exist at the bottom.

If you had ever been there you would know better, so I stand by my assessment. Don't bother responding, I won't waste further time with you.

Stay well.

It is a good example because it shows everyone that who is next on the block.

Ya'll didn't give a fuck until now and I am the poor kid trying to hold their empathy while everyone cries about their last 5 years that has been my last 35. If I can have empathy for this Woman who very likely would have crossed the street for me back in the day you can to. I had nothing and was homeless as a result numerous times in my childhood, teen years, and early adult life. One shouldn't have to hit the bottom to be heard.

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good and stop competing in the Trauma Olympics.

You aren't helping anyone by doing either.

The man was six leaves away from becoming a legend.

I really hate these CBC articles where they talk about a huge, legitimate issue, but undercut it by choosing a crazy/unrelated example

So a Woman is forced to sell her home in a divorce, and to ensure her children don't get upended in a very difficult part of their lives, sacrifices every cent she makes to stay in the same area for them and you think that is an "unrelated example"?

Even 30 years ago, I had friends who had to change schools/share a room when their parents divorced. Putting someone who refuses to make tough decisions and try live within her means in the same category as adults who have to live with multiple roommates, face homelessness, etc. is insulting.

What is insulting is your complete lack of empathy for your "friends" who were forced into that growing up, and your attack on this Woman for not putting her children through that.

Also, I’m pretty sure most would say child support is income, even if it’s not taxable income. She’s spending 100% of her employment income/paycheques on rent.

Yes, and 100% of that support is supposed to go to the children it is paid to. Not for her to use on other things.

In case it isn't clear, your comment is absolutely disgusting and tone deaf. You should reflect on why you feel the need to attack people who are struggling when it is clear to me from your lack of empathy you have no idea what a real struggle looks like.

It will never stop making me laugh that a rat on the BC/Alta border goes one way getting to be "adopted" and taught to drive a tiny car; or goes the other way and every single person would risk their life to swerve into and run over it with a full sized one.

While cute, we as humans need to stop teaching smart animals how to use our tech. We are basically asking to be replaced at this point. haha

Everyone Talks about Alberta or Quebec leaving Canada but I never understood why there is not more support for BC leaving Canada.

We make mad money and we don't need to worry about it going to other provinces if we are on our own. We basically operate as our own country already, might as well make it official. Maybe Washington, Oregon, and California will come with us and we can own the whole damn west coast.

Where is the bill to make child marriage illegal if we want to speak about "protecting the children"? How about proper funding, staffing, and over site of Child protection services?

It is disgusting looking at how many lengths politicians go to ignore, and prevent changes to, those laws while making nothing issues the "solution".

I am going to keep saying this. Anyone down to form a party?

Normal people exclude context and relevant media when providing examples of the things they have seen or heard?

No wonder the world is on fire.

Why do you not find it weird to talk about a video you watched without providing a link to the video?

One does not need security clearance to discuss the actual important things like economics, social issues, and everything else publicly available.

One cannot be Prime Minister with out extensive security clearances. If The leader of the opposition wants to play this game he will effectively never be able to become PM even if he gets elected. My guess is that he is currently cleaning house before election season to ensure he can be cleared and "Lay the lie to rest" about why he never got clearances before.

Things that require clearances are not things that should be discussed in public, that is why they require clearance. The way our officials and leaders are treating intelligence operations and institutions is a damn joke and we will be lucky to keep our place in sharing alliances after this. Even if he got cleared he couldn't do anything with the "facts" and he can do more without the facts legally.

The problem is the bullshit is working and I am very disappointed in my fellow humans occupying this country.

Chickens do not need to be crammed together in order to produce eggs, eggs are an incredible source of numerous nutrients, help with the bodies management of cholesterol, and getting eggs is also sustainable when not brought to mass production levels of crazy.

Red meat is an issue in large quantities. No one should be eating it on a daily basis for what it gives nutritionally. It can still be eaten, and does still have a lot to offer when it is not over consumed. Just like basically everything else one can eat.

The problem is scale and misinformation, not the food source itself.

How is this comment helpful or productive?

I agree that Nuclear has become a bit of a moot point as it should have been a transitional solution ages ago. I can admit a lot of that one is the salty taste left in my mouth from it all.

You do raise some fair points, especially in regard to priorities within the other parties and their stances on environment. What you cite with the NDP is one of the reasons they have potential to lose my vote as soon as the issues I see with the Greens aren't so damning to me.

What I would love to see is a party that walks the good parts of both the Green and NDP platforms and getting rid of the non sense. I am legitimately trying to determine if I have the time and ability myself because I am quite sick of what has happened to Canadian Politics. I even have a rough draft platform. haha

Keep crying about companies, I will keep doing what I am doing. Meet back in a year and we can see who is happier at the end of it. Deal?

Go argue for the sake of it elsewhere and come back when you have a real point to make.

"They" don't get a free pass, I never said "they" did. I don't support "them", and if every one else did the same, "they" wouldn't be a problem.

Quite simple when you think about it.

Yes I do. Can you explain how I was some how unclear? This will be to my benefit in the future because I really do not know how I could have been more explicit.

Corporation literally means "Group of people". Your citation is worthless to your argument because it ignores that fact, which also supports my point. Thank you for that and have a wonderful day.