But in my defense your honor… oh, ugh, my… my heart!
SkepticalButOpenMinded
joined 2 years ago
Funding these sorts of public services often pay for themselves. Early intervention can completely change a child's course cognitively, academically and socially. The lost human potential is tragic, but even from the perspective of cold dollars, it's penny wise pound foolish.
I do agree with you that MapleEngineer is being silly. You can't just dismiss Canadian Dimension because it's "on the left". Frankly, the best Canadian journalism is on the left, including The Tyee, The Narwhal, Canadaland, Literary Review of Canada, etc.
That said, I think these labels can be useful. I doubt you would object so strongly if someone pointed out that Rebel News is far right. If I didn't know what Rebel News was, I would consider that useful information. I would sooner say that reality has a left leaning bias than deny that a news source is left leaning.
It may surprise those who don't live here that 80% of Vancouver proper looks like a sleepy suburb of detached single family homes. It is mostly detached homes here. Even a townhouse can take a decade to build due to NIMBYs.
150 units potentially going up for long-term rent in just a single building? This new law may have much more of an effect than people anticipate. Even if it only has a minor effect, I'm happy this government seems to be implementing literally every good idea out there.
I mean, I think Canadian Dimension themselves would admit that they are on the far left of the political spectrum. But that's not a bad thing per se. I want to see a spectrum of perspectives in the media, so long as those perspectives are factual and in good faith (which many on the far right are not).
I do find their reporting to be lower quality and less factual than other left leaning sources, like Fair.org or Current Affairs. So this seems like a fair assessment to me.
No, red means stop.
What are you taking about? Plenty of intersections are green on left turn and straight at the same time.
“Left turn yield until (left arrow)”
Not arguing about what the actual traffic laws are. I am arguing that this is objectively confusing design. "Left turn yield on green (CIRCLE)" does not mean that left turn yields on green. It means, "when turning left, but the solid light is green, and the left turn arrow is not lit up, yield to oncoming traffic. But if the solid light is green and the left turn arrow is lit, then do not yield." So you literally do not yield on green.
Sure you can just tell people to "please learn the road signs" no matter how terrible... or we can acknowledge that this is an asinine design. I have no idea why anyone would spend energy defending this.
This is a great take down of an idea so stupid that I didn’t realize people were pushing for it. The stupid idea being replacing fixed route public transportation with government subsidized on demand rideshare.
Can someone explain what’s going on? I’m not sure I follow.