There's a distinction between believing something exists and ignoring it's long term ramifications vs "celebrating carbon".
If people want to run things into the ground I can't imagine someone be called anything other than a idiot if you don't have a exit strategy. Also something to be said about the division of profits .
Fair assesment for the politicians and lobbiest.
What about their supporters, is defunding of education plus the governments doing nothing against misinformation enough to justify their actions?
A 2012 report from David Campanella, then the public policy research manager for the Parkland Institute, and Greg Flanagan, a public finance economist, concluded that privatization has led to Albertans paying more compared to public stores.
Out of the many repost of this story since Friday this is most wild claim I've seen. It's on r/Canada level of ignorance.
The authors of the study by the non-partisan Fraser Institute
I've also never seen something with that many citation on Wikipedia.
Credit bureaus are testing the inclusion of rent payments in credit scores, saying it’s a positive move launched by Ottawa.
Translation: The 2 private companies that monopolize peoples credit ratings says they're very happy that the federal government pushed even more business and influence their way.
For anyone wondering. If you wish to make a complaint, contact your provincial or territorial consumer affairs office. The federal government doesn’t regulate credit bureaus.
The article heavily leans on Ontario and what doesn't work.
If anyone wondering how things are going for a province the adopted a payment system less focused on volume.
700 more family physicians in B.C. since payment revamp: doctors
It's amazing that a 7 billion dollar company goes to court to fight someone for $800. Aside from obviously being in the wrong.
...awarding $650.88 in damages for negligent misrepresentation.
$36.14 in pre-judgment interest and $125 in fees
B.C.’s Housing Minister, Ravi Kahlon, told Global News Monday that this couple’s landlord should “give himself a head shake” but he is in a legal position to do this.
“I mean, this is the challenge that we have with sometimes landlords and tenants. Most landlords are good people and they operate in a good, transparent way. But this is a situation in which reminds us that we need to continue to find ways to strengthen the rules to ensure that the tenants are protected when they move into new places,” Kahlon said.
I really don't understand why people keep perpetuating the belief that vast majority of landlord are anything but for profit investors and society should treat them as such.
This loophole has existed and been used unfairly for a long time now I really don't understand why they haven't amended the RTA to at least cap the extra occupancy increase and exempt a reasonable amount of children.
For those that don't know she was mayor of a town of 1,500 people. Generally places of this size aren't paying someone enough for it to be a full time job.
This article has a good chart for BC with population and mayor's salaries.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-mayors-councillors-salaries-2021-1.6518877
"Hodgins says he was offered a C$2,000 flight voucher by the airline, but said compensation would not “fix the problem” of how the airline failed its disabled passengers."
Given how much this seems to be happening I'd be for fining any airline that does this 100k. Half for the victims and half for disability advocacy groups.
Microsoft's pay guidelines for job offers:
Level 70:
Base pay: $231,700 to $361,500
On-hire stock awards: $310,000 default to $1.2 million with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $945,000
Level 69:
Base pay: $202,400 to $316,000
On-hire stock awards: $235,000 default to $1.1 million with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $750,000
Level 68:
Base pay: $186,200 to $291,000
On-hire stock awards: $177,000 default to $1 million with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $490,600
Level 67:
Base pay: $171,600 to $258,200
On-hire stock awards: $168,000 default to $700,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $336,000
Level 66:
Base pay: $157,300 to $236,300
On-hire stock awards: $75,000 default to $600,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $160,000
Level 65:
Base pay: $144,600 to $216,600
On-hire stock awards: $36,000 default to $300,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $90,000
Level 64:
Base pay: $125,000 to $187,700
On-hire stock awards: $24,000 default to $250,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $60,000
Level 63:
Base pay: $113,900 to $171,500
On-hire stock awards: $17,000 default to $200,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $44,000
Level 62:
Base pay: $103,700 to $156,400
On-hire stock awards: $11,000 default to $125,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $32,000
Level 61:
Base pay: $92,600 to $138,100
On-hire stock awards: $6,500 default to $75,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $24,000
Level 60:
Base pay: $83,500 to $125,000
On-hire stock awards: $4,500 default to $50,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $16,000
Level 59:
Base pay: $74,400 to $110,800
On-hire stock awards: $3,000 default to $30,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: $0 to $12,000
Level 58:
Base pay: $70,300 to $92,600
On-hire stock awards: $2,500 default to $20,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: "By career stage"
Level 57:
Base pay: $63,800 to $83,000
On-hire stock awards: $1,500 default to $10,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: "By career stage"
Level 56:
Base pay: $60,700 to $77,900
On-hire stock awards: $1,500 default to $10,000 with approval
Annual stock award range: "By career stage"
Level 55:
Base pay: $55,200 to $71,300
On-hire stock awards: N/A
Annual stock award range: "By career stage"
Level 54:
Base pay: $51,600 to $67,000
On-hire stock awards: N/A
Annual stock award range: "By career stage"
Level 53:
Base pay: $46,600 to $59,700
On-hire stock awards: N/A
Annual stock award range: "By career stage"
Level 52:
Base pay: $42,500 to $54,600
On-hire stock awards: N/A
Annual stock award range: "By career stage"
I've made exponential profits on CNQ and fully understand how much money is generated from O&G. I'm also fully aware that many people lives will have a substantial negative trajectory due to current climate change conditions.
You can't keep going to this big profits small costs argument without details of how much benefits and burdens is allocated to the parties involved.
Also to be upfront about it. I find your grammar thing to be rather annoying so this will be the end of the conversation for me.