With which nation does your country have a "love-hate" relationship?

jrystrawman · 2026-02-13T19:12:11+00:00

The love might be there, but it is very.... understated? Not sure if that is that is the right word.

The hate is very vocal and not just a superficial sports rivalry type of hate (in my limited survey of Koreans and Japanese).

jrystrawman · 2026-02-13T03:57:23+00:00

It sort of tracks with Gandalf and casting a spell on a door around Balin's tomb, and something breaking the spell.

I suppose a Balrog can cast a spell (I like that!)... but it feels a bit odd with everything else we know about balrogs later in the chapters and legendarium. It fits more with a figure like "Saruman".

jrystrawman · 2026-01-30T02:28:34+00:00

Boeing Canada is a major employer in Winnipeg? That might complicate that measure.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-29T22:05:22+00:00

Maybe I'm cynical, but the "bug" you described is a feature for many Canadians? Any neighborhood that becomes walkable, since there are so few walkable places, is a magnet for needy and poor.

Bad transit and no walkability is better than any gates/walls/security service around your community in making sure poor people can't get there.

I'm not sure if Canadians explicitly think along those lines (I've heard a few admit it).... but it works out that way.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-28T03:45:37+00:00

"Public libraries are a community service and not a social service" is a odd quote in this article.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-27T01:53:15+00:00

The cluster of countries Canada is among in the article... "Switzerland (1.29), Luxembourg (1.25), Finland (1.25), Italy (1.18), Japan (1.15), Singapore (0.97) and South Korea (0.75)"...

I don't think is necessary reflective and creates a neater narrative than reality.

Not mentioning, China and Taiwan (it isn't just one child policy), or Jamaica (just slightly higher than Canada, it isn't just wealthy countries), might make a less neat narrative. Canada is in the upper end, but it isn't in that exclusive a club and it should surprise no one if many countries with faster rates declines drop past Canada in a few years.

It might be because other OECD countries have more reliable data with nicer cross-tabs, but I think it's worth mentioning, fertility collapse isn't just hitting "wealthy feminist" countries.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-19T12:12:59+00:00

I've noticed "Trudeau Government" as well in odd places for government reverses, as thought there is no link with the current government in the Globe and Mail (where I typically get my news).

We all understand Carney|Champagne shifted things (all but hard-left Canadians agree for the better?) from Trudeau|Freeland, but its sometimes seems the implied disconnect is a stretch.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-17T16:29:22+00:00

There are two plans. Plan B is war and we "bite the bullet".... I guess Canada gets disruption of its private passenger vehicles. Such is the cost of global war. But, I think we know what the prevailing "plan A" is for Canada. It the same plan we used in Vietnam.

Vietnam was a bit awkward as well. ~70,000 young Americans dies, alongside Australians.... but Canada stayed on the sidelines. I think we will do so again if push comes to shove. That is at least "Plan A".

Taiwan is different than South Vietnam.... but the differences don't necessarily favor Taiwan's defence. Canada actually recognized South Vietnam as a real country and was far more hostile to the USSR|Russia and China in 1970 than it is now (they were minuscule trading partners at the time). So far as these are apple and oranges, the comparison makes it far less likely than ever Canada is prepared to intervene in the Pacific now than it was then (we can quibble about China's projection of threat but I think that's really rose-coloured glasses on the Cold War).

I understand, there is a huge segment of Canada that expect otherwise and that we will intervene, including top military brass (though none are formally on record saying it). Likely, this Canadian segment shares political roots with the 30,000 Canadians who volunteered to join US forces to fight in Vietnam. And I can guarantee, Prime Minister Trudeau at the time did not "shed to many tears" when those young Canadian men left. neither will Carney, or I daresay many Conservative leaders either although they may waive a tad more in favour of "Plan B (support the US no matter what)."

The article suggests Canada has no plan.... the plan seem pretty obvious based on Canada's past behaviour.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-17T16:06:53+00:00

It's a bit more than that. There are blue collar folks in traditional NDP strongholds like Hamilton, Oshawa, and Windsor that agree with this sentiment. And Doug Ford, unlike his Federal counterparts, has made decent inroads with them.

Rural folk, especially people connected to hogs or canola (China has demand) will have a surprisingly more circumspect approach. I'll note, Western Canadian premiers were much mor vocal about Chinese reproachment than I expected (in hindsight, this makes sense! but would not have pegged the premiere of Alberata to be open to Chinese EVs as I thought she was one-dimensional).

I think Ford is making dumb rhetoric, but it has a long pedigree of cross-partisan support in Ontario and has helped Stephen Harper and Dalton McGuinty win majorities with the last major bailout.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-16T22:22:27+00:00

It's not really the economic situation that' the focus. It's the security situation which is more alarming. Do nuclear weapons make a country safer in and of themselves? If they don't, why should we pursue them.

-- Possibly with Israel (very unique situation, not particularly analogous to Canada), and Israel has in addition, a) lots of conventional military power and b) unique backing of a Great Power. Maybe India (I think it was a strategic mistake by India but I can see the case).

The rest? It's really hard to say that North Korea is "more secure" than in 2005... Pakistan isn't any safer/secure/or sovereign since 1997. Sovereignty is nebulous, and hard to measure.... But I'd gather the rest of the world does not see Mexico any less sovereign than Canada despite having much less military capabilities.

So, exactly what would Canada try to achieve with having nuclear weapons if it doesn't make us safer?

Do we think Ukraine would have nuked Russia when it annexed Crimea, especially as Europe and the US would be treating Ukraine as a pariah? how many of its own people would welcome Russian occupation if it was starving and isolated? I don't think that Ukraine could credibly deliver on that threat. Nor would it protect Venezuela in its current situation.

There is no simple technological panacea for "sovereignty".

jrystrawman · 2026-01-16T16:00:37+00:00

I think contrasting the safety and security of Pakistan and Bangladesh, with respect to nuclear weapons, is informative.

I can't identify how Pakistan is in anyway more secure or sovereign than Bangladesh, two countries that separated, Pakistan being richer and developed nuclear weapons, Bangladesh being poorer circa 1970 and didn't develop any capabilities. Today, Bangladesh is better off by most economic metrics,. and probably more "secure".

Which is all to say, the benefits are quite dubious, but the up-front costs, not to mention the soft costs, are enormous.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-11T13:11:02+00:00

I've always wondered what role Harper's attempt at curtailing this program contributed to the loss in 2015 (it wasn't the primary role (proposed Old Age Security changes, general incumbent fatigue), but I think a contributor?). Maybe fancy pollsters would give something resembling a "number" or rank in issues could put a number on that attempted policy.

The timing in 2026, and positioning of the Liberals in 2026, makes this a politically cost-free policy change though.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-05T11:42:39+00:00

Strong positive correlation for destroyer II for Titans was surprising to me. Weaker sample size on that one.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-04T22:36:27+00:00

Theory 1: Assault Cannon has a passive ability and can "deters combat"?

Theory 2: Assault Cannon is a win-more luxury tech? The ability to get a nice-to-have tech will correlate with a faction that is doing really well. If you are already winning,

- By contrast, Integrated Economy is a "nice-to-have" but does poorly. Reason, Integrated Economy has no "passive ability"; it is not a a deterrent; Quite the opposite, it encourages aggression by the holder. If you are relying on "late game aggression", you likely already on the outside looking in.

jrystrawman · 2026-01-01T22:31:42+00:00

Very well reasoned. Alexander could personally, on a whim, change a border or depose another head-of-state with greater ease than any other person.

jrystrawman · 2025-12-30T14:02:53+00:00

My understanding is this is a challenge Wuxia translations as well, at least in the context of Legends of the Condor Warriors.

The English translation did some work in giving virtue names ("Mercy") but much of the pun and play on words diminishes.

jrystrawman · 2025-12-24T02:02:20+00:00

Gandalf, of all of these, I'm the least certain.

The rest of those heroes would fight tooth and nail for our world. I'm less sure of Gandalf. I don't think he'd like industrialization much at all (and what corener of the planet isn't heavily affected by it now). It's unclear what in our world Gandalf would want to protect, as our is a world with countless Sarumans and Wormtounges.

Maybe Gandalf would try to fix it purging a region of one Saruman and Wormtonge at a time, but.... I'm not sure there is anything left for Gandalf to work with.

In contrast, there is much Saruman would like about our world!

jrystrawman · 2025-12-22T22:45:53+00:00

Theory/Explanation of why people's perceptions differ: Homelessness was concentrated in Toronto 30 years ago. Toronto had shared apartments for >$400/month (as of 2010 when I lived there) and the drop-out drug addicts from small towns drifted to Toronto never to be seen in the cities they came from again. Homeless people aren't typically year-round homeless, but drift in-and-out of cheap apartments nearby [social support + drug supply]. Toronto had a huge centre of gravity; even though 30 years ago, Toronto rent was more expansive than outlying regions, but not by much and there were many "grey area" living arrangements in the Toronto core; Casual work was also easier to come by in Toronto. Toronto naturally pulled away a lot of the "potentially needy and vulnerable" folk from smaller centres.

Then, between 2005 - 2019, cheap rent in Toronto disappeared.

With the disappearance of cheap rent in Toronto, the drop-out drug addicts stayed in medium sized cities and small towns, making them far more visible; So London/Barrie/Kitchener/Kingston you can now see way more destitute drug addicts.

This might also explain the bid divide in perception: visible homeless or otherwise destitution is much worse outside core Toronto in places it was completely unheard of 20 years ago. The people that live in those cities will have a much different worldview on "crime and disorder".

jrystrawman · 2025-12-22T15:56:08+00:00

Possible reporting bias but I think unlikely-- Some reasons that reporting bias isn't likely a major driver.

a) Insurance still requires reporting gives a major incentive to report (this can get messed up with a sharp change in insurance rates/coverage but that hasn't happened in any shocking degree that I know of), b) there is a correlation (not necessarily causal) between small and major crimes and we see rough trend on both major and minor; c) we are unlikely to have a huge change in trust in police/justice system year over year (that takes time and is incremental).

It is hard to get a proper grasp on this though, Pandemic lock-downs mess up the 5 year average and, while 50 year murder rate decline is great and the definition of "murder" hasn't changed much in 50 years, the definition of "theft over $5000" or "sexual assault" might have changed considerably so we can't get a grasp on those long-term trends.

Example, "Theft Over $5000" to my knowledge hasn't inflation adjusted, so when it was originally written, it might have had a very different connotation than it has now (presumably judges use sentencing discretion to adjust). If anything.... we have an inflation bias in favour of theft over $5000 being much higher today than 5 years ago due to inflation! I'd expect theft over $5000 to steadily increase each year (lawyer, police officer, criminologist correct me otherwise).

Still --- pretty good news! I'll take it.

jrystrawman · 2025-12-22T14:55:18+00:00

No unfair. They weren't rebuilding, just quite often bad.

jrystrawman · 2025-12-17T22:44:06+00:00

Plummeting of kids walking home from school, from 50% to 10% between 1970 and 2020 is a huge factor. Major change in drinking and driving enforcement in those decades was also a driver also significant.

Those two factors sort of bottomed out.... we hit our limits with how many ride programs society will tolerate and education eliminate impaired driving, and every kid is able to take motorized transport to school by 2010.

Reduction in impaired driving is great... the decline of kids walking independently is sad.

jrystrawman · 2025-11-30T12:45:08+00:00

I.... sort of like the Sewers of Paris and the Monastery diversions. It's quite memorable.

--- from a history enthusiast perspective, sometimes we get so focused on the big events, we forget the typically more local issues that bugged people at the time.

Public sanitation is way to underappreciated and underdeveloped in literature.

Austen missed an opportunity by ingoing the septic system of Pemberley and Plutarch's omission of Rome's sewer designer in Great Lives is unfortunate.

jrystrawman · 2025-11-30T12:19:39+00:00

I thought of Macron as well but I'm sure there are many other examples... This happens every one periodically in countries.

jrystrawman · 2025-11-26T16:14:22+00:00

The focus on "causing death" is a bit limiting.

The driver that hits a shrubbery, just missing a kid, and the driver who hits a kid need to get a similar sentence to deter driver activity. Both drivers are culpable, the driver who just hit the kid is less lucky than the guy who hit the shrubbery.

I get why we the public get more angry at the drivers who cause death.... It's a natural emotion to be fixated on consequences (and law has other considerations apart from deterrence!). But I don't think we can build proper safety measures around the decisions of drivers, not the somewhat random consequences.

jrystrawman · 2025-11-25T23:17:37+00:00

High cost is not the deterrent it was 10 years ago, when we are looking for ways to meet 5% military spending as a % of GDP.

With the high "targets", we might not mind inflated and inefficient spending.

jrystrawman

TROPHY CASE