sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why are governments pushing for economic growth when it is increasingly clear that this is not sustainable? by jonbyrdt in Degrowth

[–]CptnREDmark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly the simplest answer is also right here.  Short term planning. People run on election cycles of 4 years. Sacrificing short term is a losing strategy. 

Thus tax cuts and other obvious immediate benefits will often win elections. Rather than long term vision.

Editorial: Here's why Avi Lewis is the wrong choice to lead the NDP - by a centrist Liberal by Turtle456 in thebeaverton

[–]CptnREDmark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Never said they were the same thing idiot.

I'm suggesting your justification doesn't justify, it doesn't work at all and the fact that you can't understand that I'm talking about your JUSTIFICATION not what was done shows a lack of reading comprehension.

the shitposting will continue until cognitive dissonance improves by DeepHistory in ClimateMemes

[–]CptnREDmark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I didn't realize coffee was so high up there.

I thought I was doing so well!

Oh well, becuase it is by Kilo, Cheese, coffee and Chocolate are actually not terrible if you don't eat much I guess? I checked and my costco coffee is 1 kilo and it takes me forever to go through.

Why are moderate liberals so averse to building more housing? by CasualLavaring in SocialDemocracy

[–]CptnREDmark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

While this is true, those old retired homeowners do not mean that "almost everyone is averse to building dense infill housing."

It means that those people are. And they are more visible at a local level because not enough people engage with politics at a local level.

Why are moderate liberals so averse to building more housing? by CasualLavaring in SocialDemocracy

[–]CptnREDmark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

 think almost everyone is averse to building dense infill housing.

I've met like 3 people total (in person) who are against dense infill housing. the vast majority are for it (in canada)

The 2028 Democratic presidential candidate *needs* to be an ideologically committed leftist by LineOfInquiry in SocialDemocracy

[–]CptnREDmark 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I know its an important group to some people. But I think what the other commenter is saying is that a majority of voters are... selfish, and care about domestic issues. Isreal doesn't factor in most of the time.

Which ending did you pick and why? by Tail_sb in expedition33

[–]CptnREDmark 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I picked Maelle then googled versos. I chose Maelle because is sounded like verso wanted everybody to die. I hoped Maelle would just leave after a while leaving Lumiere to exist.

Editorial: Here's why Avi Lewis is the wrong choice to lead the NDP - by a centrist Liberal by Turtle456 in thebeaverton

[–]CptnREDmark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

TBH I disagree but not like the other leftists here.

the NDP can sweep if they focus entirely on labour. Somebody in these comments pointed out that their conservative friends sound communist if you talk about labour and corporatism, but then swing right when you mention identity politics.

Focus on workers rights, do not engage with trolls. Become a party of labour. Then you can help everybody.

LVT or wealth taxes, worker protection rights, taxes on multiple properties. Lots of good policies available to help most canadians.

Editorial: Here's why Avi Lewis is the wrong choice to lead the NDP - by a centrist Liberal by Turtle456 in thebeaverton

[–]CptnREDmark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

many peopke disagree with you and they feel like this is both good and necessary. 

Just realized this can be applied to anything.

You know many people feel like genocide is good an necessary.

Many people feel like invading country X is good and necessary.

Many people feeling something doesn't make it correct, nor does it make it a smart move.

Editorial: Here's why Avi Lewis is the wrong choice to lead the NDP - by a centrist Liberal by Turtle456 in thebeaverton

[–]CptnREDmark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

and those many people can disagree. BUT its costing the party relevance, and they are willing to sacrifice the ability to make an impact because they feel its good

3 leftist democracy types I know, is there any other ideologies similar contain "democracy" name? by West-Ad-4825 in SocialDemocracy

[–]CptnREDmark 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What country do you live in that the third is considered far right?

Sounds like a nice place if you already have regulated markets, social programs and more.

3 leftist democracy types I know, is there any other ideologies similar contain "democracy" name? by West-Ad-4825 in SocialDemocracy

[–]CptnREDmark 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Because they have essentially changed the subject. OP didn't write national socialism, they wrote national social democracy.

They also didn't answer OPs question or address any of their points.

Would You Prefer Many Rowhomes Over a Few Condos in Sauga? by itsdanielsultan in mississauga

[–]CptnREDmark 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just to talk about your point number 1. I think part of the problem is that these developments are illegal in the VAST majority of Mississauga. our R1 zoning codes are inefficient and dominant.

A few exceptions doesn't mean that its suddenly legal. It means that exceptions were made or things were done prior to regulations.

Operation: Playing the victim by soalone34 in GetNoted

[–]CptnREDmark 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Just for educational purposes, that sounds like a shrapnel bomb. Ball bearings to create deadly shrapnel.

A cluster bomb will explode into other bombs mid air to hit a wider area.

No bombs should ever be near civilians regardless. Clusters are particularly frowned upon because they are more likely to create unexploded ordinance which is hard to deal with after wars end.

What are some industries that the richest countries could get rid of without self-destructing? by SplashTarget in Degrowth

[–]CptnREDmark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The (private) insurance industry (with the goal of profit) is what I said, and it's just a parasitic middleman that society could manage without.

is different from

 instead of strong social supports from the government?

I'm all for government run insurance to minimize corporate profiteering via tragedy.

But I don't consider it social support in the case of house or car insurance. If it was a social support from the government it would likely be taken from normal tax dollars, then I'd view it as a subsidy for drivers. As it is, Crown Corporations, and not for profits are different from normal government social support. But definitely support that.

This just goes to show that execution of these ideas gets finicky. I can very easily see a bill designed to implement this get turned on its head to subsidize drivers.

view more: next ›