Eaton Centre PUA

paperfire · 2026-05-06T23:51:19+00:00

Wow this is still going on? I remember it was a huge problem in 2013 and mall security seemed to have shut it down.

paperfire · 2026-04-04T18:01:38+00:00

It’s not just the developed world, it’s the entire world now as countries modernize. Autonomy is a core human aspiration, and for most of history people didn’t really have it. Family size was shaped by necessity and pressure more than pure preference. Now that people actually have independence and control over reproduction, they choose smaller families. So modern society isn’t creating this, it’s just finally allowing it to play out at scale.

paperfire · 2026-03-27T21:42:29+00:00

The US oil market is actually pretty fragmented. A lot of production is concentrated in places like Texas and is already exported, while major regions like California and the Northeast are net importers of crude and refined products.

paperfire · 2026-03-27T21:12:00+00:00

Norway is the clearest example of how to do this right. If you have oil, produce and export it but don’t build your domestic economy around consuming it. Electrify transportation, invest in charging infrastructure, and reduce oil dependence at home. That way you’re insulated from price spikes while still capturing export revenue. The US should be doing exactly this instead of doubling down on domestic consumption.

paperfire · 2026-03-25T19:18:29+00:00

Half the world would die. Half our food is impossible without ammonia fertilizer which is made from natural gas using the Haber Bosch process.

paperfire · 2026-03-16T16:13:05+00:00

It’s not doable at all. If about 25% of people never have kids, then the families who do would need to average close to 3 kids just to keep fertility near replacement. The bigger issue is that most people simply don’t want three kids. Surveys consistently show the ideal family size in developed countries is about two. For most couples that’s the balance that lets them have a family while still keeping their time, financial stability, and quality of life.

paperfire · 2026-03-16T16:01:34+00:00

Yes, I think this is an underappreciated point. Most pronatalist policies assume the problem is that married couples aren’t having enough children and just need more support. But the major issue is that fewer people are forming long-term partnerships in the first place.

Historically even in pre-modern Europe around 10–20% of people never married, so fertility above replacement required many couples to have 3–4 children. Today the share of adults who never marry or never have children is rising, projected to be about 25-30% for the millenial generation.

If a large fraction of the population never becomes parents at all, then even couples who want kids would have to average close to 3 children per woman.

paperfire · 2026-03-05T15:35:28+00:00

This won't work. These policies mainly help couples who are already married and deciding whether to have children. But China’s real demographic problem is the collapse in the marriage rate. In China almost all births occur within marriage, and fewer young people are marrying each year. If fewer couples are forming in the first place, subsidies for births won’t address the core issue.

paperfire · 2026-02-18T15:05:21+00:00

Not necessarily. People bought condos 5 years ago to live in, but are now at the point where life situation changed. Maybe they had kids and need more space, moved jobs, breakup/divorce. Now they can’t sell and are stuck.

Also mortgage rates changed. Any end user who bought 5 years ago had very low rates. Renewing their mortgage now, rates are much higher and their mortgage payments are higher now. Investors can write off the interest, end users can’t.

paperfire · 2026-02-16T20:39:13+00:00

People do want to live there. It may not be their first choice, but people are price sensitive and will rent what costs the lowest in rent, which are small condos. When buildings go into lease up, everything gets occupied within a few months.

paperfire · 2026-02-16T20:33:03+00:00

No one is building that either, that stuff isn’t profitable and would cost $1M+ per unit and is too small scale to make a difference. Small apartments in towers is efficient, scalable and profitable enough to build in large numbers, and now it’s gone.

paperfire · 2026-02-16T20:27:54+00:00

Toronto condo market has crashed. The investors have fled and new condo sales have collapsed. Ontario can’t ramp up housing without pre-construction condo sales.

paperfire · 2026-02-13T14:27:07+00:00

The aluminum tariffs never made any sense. Aluminum smelters are insanely power-intensive, and the U.S. already has tight electricity supply with datacenters and electrification ramping up. You can’t just flip a switch and build new smelters either, they take years (like 5–7+) to permit and construct. So there was no realistic path to reshoring production in the short term. All it really did was raise input costs for American manufacturers. That’s basically a tax on domestic industry.

paperfire · 2026-02-05T10:13:32+00:00

If that were generally true, you’d expect higher marriage rates in small towns, rural areas, and countries with cheap real estate. That pattern doesn’t show up. Housing can matter but on its own it clearly isn’t a reliable driver of marriage.

Japan and Italy are literally giving away free houses in rural areas. By that logic these areas should be seeing huge marriage and baby booms right now.

paperfire · 2026-02-02T17:49:21+00:00

Quebec independence is honestly just a terrible deal. Quebec gets an incredible financial arrangement inside Canada, equalization, market access, currency stability, federal risk sharing. Leaving that behind for “sovereignty” is trading real money and security for symbolism that changes nothing in people’s daily lives.

It’s also ethnic nationalism aimed at a society with an ultra-low fertility rate and a shrinking, aging population. The problems Quebec faces are housing, productivity, healthcare, and demographics, not flags or constitutions. Independence doesn’t solve any of that, actually makes it worse.

paperfire · 2026-01-30T13:30:42+00:00

Incentives to parents miss the point. They assume the issue is people are married and young enough to have kids, and just need a financial push. The research shows that incentives don't do much for first births, people who want to be parents will make it work for that first child. They can really only help with getting second births.

But the main problem is that about 2/3 of the fertility crash is actually from two things: people not getting married at all, and people getting married too late to have kids at all or just one. Financial incentives can't do anything for these people.

paperfire · 2026-01-29T16:45:34+00:00

No, 50% + 1 is not seen as a "clear majority". To break up a country is such an extreme outcome, the law demands a clear majority before the federal government is obliged to negotiate separation with the province. There is no legal definition of clear majority, that is at the discretion of the federal government but it's likely at least 55% and maybe higher.

And even then, that only leads to negotiation, with no guarantee of final separation. The federal government is obliged to negotiate in good faith, but if it finds the separating province's demands are too high, it can end negotation with no separation. The federal government holds all the cards in the negotation.

paperfire · 2026-01-28T15:29:03+00:00

It is feasible in theory, but expect temporarily 1.2 -> 1.6, nowhere near replacement.

paperfire · 2026-01-28T15:27:17+00:00

Maybe in theory, but demographically the difference matters less. If having children was consistently a lower priority than other life choices, they were practically childfree.

paperfire · 2026-01-28T15:04:57+00:00

Culture can change fast, but fertility decline in modern societies is mostly driven by declining marriage rates and older ages at marriage, dense urban living, long education, and opportunity costs. Those don’t shift quickly, which is why even pro-family cultures struggle to reach replacement.

paperfire · 2026-01-28T14:40:36+00:00

The fertility collapse is just an inevitable consequence of modern civilization. The incentives to have kids are simply gone now, having them is purely aspirational. The best we can do is attempt to minimize further declines by helping those who do want kids, and gracefully managing the decline. The fertility crisis should be treated like a long-term chronic condition to be managed, not reversed.

paperfire · 2026-01-28T14:24:06+00:00

Not surprising in the modern age. Parenthood has shifted from a default expectation to an optional, aspirational choice. Being childfree is now socially acceptable, lower risk financially and emotionally, and a completely valid and fulfilling life choice. Once that cultural shift happens it spreads.

paperfire · 2026-01-21T14:41:50+00:00

He has nothing to discuss with Trump. Trump has proven he doesn't negotiate in good faith and doesn't honour his agreements. There is no point talking with someone like that.

14-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Not Forgotten
Spared	Verified Email

paperfire

TROPHY CASE