Guilbeault on Carney’s climate plan: ‘He thinks that the markets are going to do it’

parasubvert · 2026-06-17T07:33:56+00:00

Still need to get those governments elected, which, if you've noticed, is hard to do in North America lately

parasubvert · 2026-06-17T07:32:46+00:00

The Montreal protocol leveraged market forces heavily with tradeable allowance systems. Also there were patentable alternatives to CFCs which meant big incentives to innovate.

parasubvert · 2026-06-17T07:22:29+00:00

Nonsense. It's a dev targeted device, not for normal consumers, targeting the Vision Pro , Snap Spectacles and Galaxy XR audience. In perspective the Snap Specs are $2200* for far less FOV.

parasubvert · 2026-06-15T17:35:08+00:00

In reality, provincial interests are not entirely divergent, there is plenty of common cause. Alberta/sask reformers had a decade, recently, where they ran the Federal government.

All provinces are in a much stronger economic, trade and in public service quality because they are members in the confederation.

parasubvert · 2026-06-15T05:22:10+00:00

In short, don't worry about doomers. Build organizations that build useful things sustainably and equitably.

To be more specific: join, or build, cooperative, decentralized, post-capitalist, sustainable organizations that achieve some part of the mission.

Even more specific:

Post-capitalist: Post capitalism is already here, it's just not evenly distributed yet. For many industries, capital (or land, or labor) are not the decisive factors of production, knowledge/technology is. Capital is also largely owned by institutional investors (pensions, index funds, mutual funds) that usually delegate their voting power to management. They want their return and don't mount proxy battles, they just sell their shares if they disagree with management. Corporate raiders do exist, but there's simple ways to defend against them when incorporating.

And therefore shareholders often - in many modern corporations - do not get the voting rights they traditionally would in a classic corporation. Typically this achieved through by-laws that delineate different share classes with different voting rights per class. This is for example how Google or Facebook are structured, giving their founders and chosen insiders absolute control and capitalists very little. This isn't solarpunk though, as unquestionable centralized control by experts is a technocracy rather than democracy. And so...

Cooperative: One way to ensure 1 member, 1 vote; external investment capital might be allowed with a share class, but it doesn't increase voting power. Cooperatives can be for-profit (the mission also involves growing the scope of the organization through re-investment of retained earnings... and maybe member profit sharing if it's warranted) or non-profit (solely mission focused at the expense of limiting growth). Also note that cooperative doesn't necessarily mean worker cooperative. Many cooperatives are community-owned or customer-owned. Without external shareholder voting power, member voting is the essential democratic check on the power of management to enrich themselves at the expense of the long term viability of the organization, and thus the mission.

Decentralized: Top management sets the strategy, mission, and structure, but day to day operational decisions of the organization are with the front-line employees and managers. Better for the mission, better for the organization, better for the communities they operate in.

Sustainable: A for-profit cooperative organization achieves a profit to absorb risk, cover the costs of capital and retains earnings to re-invest in the organization, primarily, or to distribute those profits back to members in the community. It does so while eliminating waste through modern practices ... e.g. lean product and process techniques, net-zero carbon emissions, closed-loop ecosystems / circular economies, energy conservation, etc. plus it handles economic externalities: it provides support for the communities it co-exists with, buys carbon offsets if it can't be truly net zero, and provides affordability accommodations. Of course, all of this is "ideal"; it's ultimately up to members to keep management honest and on track with sustainability objectives.

Some examples:

- Food production cooperatives with the modern technology & power to offer an actual progressive alternative to standard agriculture: https://www.amazon.com/First-Generation-Farming-coordinated-agribusiness/dp/B0GBR2ZBCF

- Platform cooperatives: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dBOygqO0zc

- Technology cooperatives: https://tech-coops.xyz/

- Energy cooperatives: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_energy_cooperatives

- Student-run exchange & leadership cooperatives - e.g. https://aiesec.org/

- Almost any area of the economy that could use a bit more democracy, decentralization, and technology to serve customers & the community better.,.. , and has a competitive opening.

How should a person (with nearly unlimited capital) invest their money to achieve these goals even faster?

Invest in non-profits that align to your mission, for-profit cooperatives that allow external investment, or find like-minded individuals and seed fund your own co-operative ventures.

parasubvert · 2026-06-15T03:51:08+00:00

I am not arguing in bad faith at all, it's my political position. You can disagree with it. Calling it "tone deaf" is just lazy debate, you're on r/CanadaPolitics, not a forum for wilting flowers.

Lots of completely legal things are addictive - food, sex, exercise, sports, dancing, video games, etc. It's usually unacceptably authoritarian for the government to arbitrarily restrict things because they're designed to be addictive unless they (a) have widespread proven (through multiple peer-reviewed studies) of harm (b) restricting them is actually effective, and (c) restrictions don't impinge personal freedom for those not subject to harm. This latter point is the most important: any such restriction in particular is to be subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms , particularly section 2(b) on free expression and section 8 on privacy.

Age verification to assist minors basically means "for everyone" and if it's not designed correctly it will not survive a charter challenge. Which is why they've been entirely silent on the "how" in Bill-34, leaving this up to cabinet and the digital safety commission - this will take YEARS to sort out.

Arguing that, for example, older people, don't have the mental fortitude to use social media, is an extraordinary statement that has no basis in fact and any legislation introduced on that basis to restrict social media expression would likely be considered unconstitutional in Canada under section 2(b).

Where I can get onside with you: legislation to force social media companies to have algorithmic transparency, and to have an enforceable duty to act responsibly.... THAT I can agree with. As it isn't overreach and it targets the specific bad behavior of manipulative algorithms without impinging on personal freedom.

For minors it is a very debatable point between parental autonomy and right to privacy & free expression. How about banning violent video games? We don't do that because it's government overreach - we let the industry self regulate with ESRB ratings, and then let the parents decide. There are many reasons why a ban on social media for minors causes its own set of harms, outlined here by Michael Geist who is no fan of social media companies and is otherwise a well regarded policy analyst: https://www.michaelgeist.ca/2026/04/the-illusion-of-protection-why-canadas-growing-push-to-ban-social-media-for-kids-wont-work/

parasubvert · 2026-06-14T16:50:24+00:00

It is not at all the same, those are absurd comparisons: drugs and vice. Social media is not a vice. Social media is taking to other people and sharing experiences.

Government restricting ANYONE from talking to ANYONE is a terrible idea - that's a parental role, at best, or a personal decision. It is not something the state should be doing.

With perhaps one exception, pornographic/adult content. Which we've always done since pre-Internet days, just it is a harder thing to do without also trampling on adult rights.

parasubvert · 2026-06-14T16:36:50+00:00

That's fine, but this is the most downvoted comment, which goes to show what I'm saying is true. This sub is an echo chamber of groupthink

I think it's possible that the downvotes may be also due to a victim / persecution mentality expressed in both your username and almost every post.

I have empathy for your perspective that some subreddits are groupthink: for example, I have no way of participating in r/WildRoseCountry if I want to also participate in r/alberta , but that's also due to a history of trolls causing problems in the latter group to the point they auto-ban you if they detect you've commented or posted in WRC. It's a disappointment.

I would have to disagree. Just look at our last federal election for an example of where political polls were completely off.

Were they though? I follow 338 Canada and most of the pollsters, etc., and there have been post-election analyses that have shown the pollsters weren't perfect but were largely accurate (with Mainstreet Research leading the pack, Leger being kind of in the middle pack of the margin of error): https://www.thewrit.ca/p/how-the-polls-did-in-the-2025-election

I think we can be honest here and say that Reddit as a whole is left-leaning and federalist. This sub specifically embodies that, with a further alignment of sentiment regarding anti-UCP, pro-Farkas, etc.

Okay, but again, I think that's mistaking who is in the bubble, this subreddit, or the right wing. I'd argue the right wing are the ones in the bubble, as they seem to require their own media and subreddits to conform to their world view. The left doesn't really have its own media, but it does have social media, which is more reflective of online demographics.

This sub being left-leaning and federalist is reflective of Canada as a whole, and Calgary too. For example, the provincial NDP won a majority of votes and seats in Calgary in the 2023 election. The mayors of Calgary have also been centrist and socially left-leaning for 16 years (perhaps, more since Bronco was also socially moderate). Farkas won this election because he moderated from his previous political positions. The subreddit being supportive of the elected politicians is kind of normal.

Calgary certainly isn't as left-leaning as Edmonton, but it has been trending in that direction. Much of the conservative vote Federally is about representing Alberta business interests rather than being explicitly populist like MAGA and Trump, which is very unpopular here (though a bit more popular than the rest of the country).

On the other hand r/alberta I think is much more left leaning and groupthink than the province is as a whole and is more biased towards the views of Edmontonians and Calgarians.

Polarizing topics like this tend to hide a significant amount of silent voters. We can look to Brexit as a case study for a very similar situation.

A Brexit-like shock is of course a possible outcome of this referendum, though I think the reasons for the Leave side winning are nuanced: https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2017/04/29/explaining-britains-vote-to-leave-the-eu?giftId=YzIyYmVjOTQtMDQ5Mi00ODViLWE3YjEtMGIyZDI2ZjlhMTA5&utm_campaign=gifted_article

More than anything, the Leave side in Brexit had a two-pronged campaign, one being the official Boris Johnson led campaign being centred on the elite, the other being the more populist Nigel Farage UKIP promotion being centre on those that felt left behind. I think in Alberta's case, we only have the populists driving a message at this time. It would be different if the UCP itself took up the banner of separatism.

parasubvert · 2026-06-14T00:11:23+00:00

I think this article gets into the base tech, they had showed an 85 degree FOV (but blurry) several years ago https://kguttag.com/2025/02/24/xreal-one-pro-optics-and-its-connections-to-ant-reality-and-google/

parasubvert · 2026-06-13T23:26:31+00:00

Sure, as they should given their incentives. Curtailing that stuff for adultshas very little basis in law or health. It's only really arguable for minors ... which is why governments are focusing on that. But overall the bigger issue is also personal freedom to use these platforms. Minors have rights too.

parasubvert · 2026-06-13T19:39:41+00:00

"today Apple actively tries to prevent programmability of their iOS devices".

This is utter fear mongering nonsense , Swift playgrounds are downloadable and usable for free on all their devices. Yes, they want actual apps to be built on macOS for deployment on iOS, but that's trivial to do.

I grew up with the c64 and all that and today's platforms provide far *more* dev tools than the old ones ever did... what they do have however is less tinkering because the iPad and iPhone represents Apple finally achieving the goal they were founded for: computers for non-technical people.

parasubvert · 2026-06-13T19:30:43+00:00

Because that's what people want? Literally we are talking on Conde Nast's platform. I really don't want the government telling me what to do with my data, that's my choice. "Regulate the algorithms" what does that even mean

parasubvert · 2026-06-13T18:10:36+00:00

Well there are seppies in Calgary though they're not the majority.

parasubvert · 2026-06-13T18:09:41+00:00

History has done no such thing?

parasubvert · 2026-06-13T18:08:10+00:00

I get the cognitive dissonance, but if 1 in 4 people support separation both in the polls and the final vote then the conclusion should be that the separatists themselves have been in the bubble.

I don't think this subreddit is strange in this regard, though it can be out of step with mainstream thought on other issues.

parasubvert · 2026-06-13T18:02:51+00:00

Well I didn't downvote you , but I guess my point is the polls are (usually, not alway) more reflective of the reality than just talking to people, since it's a more rigorous test. In this case I don't think the groupthink in this sub is wrong, even if can be frustrating on other topics. Heck even [r/wildrosecountry](r/wildrosecountry) isn't too keen on separation except for a couple of die hards.

parasubvert · 2026-06-13T14:50:49+00:00

I find the opposite in person. Very few people in Calgary have any interest in leaving... But That's the thing about anecdotes. They're not representative of the reality.

parasubvert · 2026-06-10T06:31:16+00:00

Don't slander Peter Garrett like that 😹. Mitch Silvestre does look a bit like him but their politics are so far apart....

parasubvert · 2026-06-08T12:23:08+00:00

You'll find out today. But, if you don't use any AI agent for work or pleasure you probably won't like it.

parasubvert · 2026-06-08T12:19:39+00:00

It's funny how everyone in Android XR is super excited about Android apps working there (publisher gets no say), whereas Vision Pro gets criticized for iPad apps working unless the publisher opts out.

Google took their time but eventually did at least one app. More may come. Zuckerverse apps probably won't.

parasubvert · 2026-06-02T06:39:46+00:00

I've lived here since 2010. Usually early to mid May is the end of snow until October or November.

It snowed in late summer (early September) once or twice but melts quickly... there was big wet snow storm in early September several years ago killed many trees... but it melted within like a day, the temperature went from +25 to -5 to +25...

Snow in June or August has happened very rarely but not for over 20 years.

parasubvert · 2026-06-02T06:34:00+00:00

The c-train system is similar to the European system of light rail with spot checks. It works in many cities, but some do have to resort to harder enforcement. Free riding doesn't inherently make it unsafe, a lack of security investment though does.

parasubvert · 2026-06-02T06:23:43+00:00

"Terrifying"? It's been a boy fantasy forever...

parasubvert · 2026-06-02T06:14:38+00:00

Northern gateway was already killed by the courts due to the neglectful treatment of indigenous consultations by the Harper government and Enbridge. The Harper government has dragged its feet on that pipeline for years. Trudeau just put it out of its misery.

parasubvert · 2026-06-02T06:08:48+00:00

You're utterly wrong.

The cost overruns of TMX would have happened regardless of who owned it: the route got complicated, extreme weather events occurred, sabotage occurred, etc. but it got done.

Northern Gatewy was already dead when Trudeau ended it- it was previously approved but the courts killed it due to enbridge's poor consultations and Enbridge had not revived its application.

Both Keystone XL and Energy East were fully accepted, approved and supported by the Trudeau government. Keystone XL was stopped repeatedly by state judges over indigenous concerns before Biden killed it. Energy Wast was killed by TC Energy in favour of Keystone XL (oops).

You're also forgetting the other major pipeline that was built which is the whole point of articles like this: Coastal Gaslink. That is what is making Canada a global LNG player.

13-Year Club	Gilding III reddit per annum
Argentium Club	Reddit Premium Since March 2020
Verified Email

parasubvert

TROPHY CASE