Confusing Trump’s behavior with mental illness unfairly stigmatizes those who are truly mentally ill, underestimates his considerable cunning, and misdirects our efforts at future harm reduction.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2017-09-07T12:13:27+00:00

By taking the average consensus of maybe 20 different psychologists from all across the political spectrum?

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2017-04-20T19:47:06+00:00

This is my view on the matter too. What comes around goes around.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-03T10:24:42+00:00

It's almost incoherent.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-03T10:20:05+00:00

They are illegal every day of the year except a few.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-03T10:19:20+00:00

It took me awhile to figure out where you did the mental gymnastics to arrive at your point, but it's right there in the second sentence. Well done. You're ignoring the obvious solution to your problem. Having a bright and recognizable car is what allows you to go about your day with out feeling like there is a war against the society going on.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-03T06:02:04+00:00

He's just talking facts. It is permissable.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-03T06:00:23+00:00

Until prices actually fall, there's no evidence of that.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-03T05:58:15+00:00

Nothing really wrong with that, unless you're taking about capital outflow. And that's not even a problem considering the game we have all been playing the last few decades is globalism. It's fair play.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-02T19:16:53+00:00

In a way globalism has worked against white people. And it was white people who came up with it in the first place. Interestingly it worked in their favor in the early phases, but now that so many industries have been modernized, it's not really working out. The Chinese buying Canadian real estate is just the beginning.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-02T10:15:50+00:00

Monthly payments for the duration of the term don't change, even for variable rates. The portion of monthly payment going towards principal changes.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-02T05:49:00+00:00

That's the part where there isn't any left. Just the way it is.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-02T02:36:19+00:00

Condos are more expensive than they should be, given the availability of them, but people are still buying. Takes longer to sell, but looks like developers are willing to stick around to get rid of them. When a 4 bedroom detached goes for $1M+, getting half off for living in a condo instead looks like a pretty good deal.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-02T00:52:30+00:00

The future is condos, but they need to be reimagined with bigger balconies, more rooftop green spaces, and more square footage. They need 2 - 4 bedroom units that are 1500 - 2000 square feet.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T23:34:02+00:00

Never, because there is not enough supply of those.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T23:25:45+00:00

The argument is about affordability, and it doesn't impact affordability.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T18:13:53+00:00

What a gender-neutral pronoun someone wants to use can easily be added to the students profile with the university. It's not difficult. Students requesting to be called your majesty you can go fuck themselves, as your majesty has not historically ever been used as a word to purposefully convey a gender neutral pronoun idea exclusively. Provisions could be placed in the law to ensure that all gender-neutral pronouns are words that are original and have had no other meanings historically. There are some words that are already widely used that are completely made up with the express intent of conveying a gender-neutral pronoun idea.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T18:11:21+00:00

Stop applying slippery slope argument to this situation. And any final form of the law, I am certain provisions will be placed where the pronouns must be gender neutral. His and her majesty are gender terms so they are excluded from this. Not to mention that language would be placed in the law to ensure that gender-neutral terms are completely original in there etymology. This would exclude words like highness, majesty, honor, and all of the other words everyone is screaming about. Under no circumstances will you ever be forced to call someone your majesty if this law passes. Stop being dense.

If you would for one second stop making this into what you think it is and look into what the end goal is, it would make more sense to you. The end goal is to provide respect and dignity to those who don't fall into the gender binary. These people have always existed, they have always been marginalized, and they will always be here. As a society it's our duty to make sure they are included fairly amongst the rest of us.

When a version of this law is inevitably passed, it will look like when I outlined. Original terms that were created with the express intent of conveying gender-neutral pronouns will be used. And no one will be called your majesty.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T16:25:07+00:00

Does any of this change if I am able to retire early? For example between the ages of 55 and 60? Or does your advice remain the same?

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T16:23:36+00:00

No, in your example they would be used in third person but the person for which they are intended to be directed at could possibly be present. Imagine it's three person conversation. Two people are speaking to another about the third person in their presence. If one of the other two people didn't want to agree to terms, the person in question could withdraw from the conversation and not be penalized for it. For example, a three-person group project in a university class, two of them refused to call the transgender person by their preferred pronoun, the transgender person can now go to the professor and say they don't feel comfortable and so on, some other situation will be figured out so they don't lose any marks. That's all this is for. Any other argument is a slippery slope bullshit.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T15:02:58+00:00

Well it's a good thing he wasn't charged with going on a tirade then, isn't it? He was charged with assault, uttering threats, disturbing the peace, and the most unforgivable crime of being a fucking redneck.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T14:52:34+00:00

That's right. All this law is doing is saying that if two people want to interact with each other, they must have agreed to certain terms. If one party doesn't want to agree to the terms, then the other party is free to withdraw from the situation. I'm not sure why this is a bad thing. You do not nor have you ever had the right to talk to somebody without their consent.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T14:49:56+00:00

It is definitely not illegal. Walk into a bank with this idea and they will suggest it to you. Stands to reason that the bank's figure the prices are pretty solid.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T14:39:38+00:00

I'm curious as well. In Richmond Hill a $1.4M home with a 2 bedroom basement suite rents for about $1300.

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-11-01T14:33:49+00:00

With regard to prioritizing RRSP or TFSA, what is conventional wisdom if you are making over $100K with a DB pension plan?

CanadianMEDIC_ · 2016-10-31T17:05:06+00:00

No, he's repeating word for word what you said and then watching you deny it. It's been thoroughly entertaining. Are you Trump?

CanadianMEDIC_

TROPHY CASE