• 4 Posts
  • 104 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 20th, 2023

help-circle
  • This shouldn’t be a surprise, but I’m glad we have the data to prove it.

    Home prices have skyrocketed recently. Home owners whos earner is boomer-aged obviously bought long ago, and the housing prices have beaten investments in that time period (Assuming houses bough 30-40yrs ago). Anyone who rented and invested the difference is obviously not going to compete.

    Additionally, given the insanity of the rental market, anyone under 35 who has enough income to afford the monthly payments on a house has purchased in the last few years, so those who are still renting are likely those at the bottom, unable to purchase a house, and their income is likely the lowest, exacerbating this issue.

    I have yet to see anyone who can give me a good reason we don’t have laws preventing:

    • Corporate ownership of land zoned residential
    • Increasing property tax rates for each additional residential property (ie any property not classified as primary residence). It still leaves loopholes (my wife lives at house A full time, I live at house B full time), but seems like an easier way to try and shore up the speculators.

    Overall, the survey found the median net worth of Canadian households was $519,700, up 57 per cent from 2019 when it was last conducted.

    How big can a bubble get if its being artificially inflated and supported by government and businesses?-









  • Lol I quoted something from not just this article, but a second article they link to from the one above, but sure.

    They blocked her, at least in part, because she was an active alcoholic who had not shown any signs of changing her behaviour outside of time inside the hospital. Something that would have weighed on their decision included medical information such as previous attempts to stop drinking. Mental health care, including healthcare for addictions, is lacking in Canada. You can’t force someone to go into rehab, but offering better care and options might have helped her in the past.

    As said in the main article as well as the one I read, in order to qualify for a living donation you need to qualify for a full donation, because if something goes wrong you’ll need a full liver ASAP and get bumped to the top of the list.


  • Medical notes suggest she started drinking in her late teens and had tried – unsuccessfully – to quit. After periods of sobriety, she returned to alcohol, which could increase the risk of continued use after the transplant.

    Allen says Huska registered for an addiction program early on in her hospital stay to stop drinking after she’s discharged. Hospital records also say she suffers from anxiety.

    From the first article CTV made about this, linked in in the first sentence they posted. Seems like we need to actually fund mental health care in this country or something, because she’s obviously been struggling for a while. You can see how the board would weigh previous failed attempts to quit against her.




  • But doctors say that people with severe liver disease from alcohol use may need more than just a partial living liver donation to thrive.

    “The sicker someone is, the more they benefit from getting an entire liver from a deceased donor, as opposed to part of the liver from a living donor,” said Dr. Saumya Jayakumar, a liver specialist in Edmonton and an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry at the University of Alberta.

    “On the off chance their (living) liver doesn’t work, they urgently get listed for a deceased donor,” said Jayakumar. "We need to make sure that everyone who is a candidate for a living donor is also a candidate for a donor graft as well, " she added.

    Guy you were responding to wasn’t entirely accurate with what the article says, but general idea is there. If the partial liver fails, then they immediately get added to the full liver list, which is why they need to meet the full liver list requirements. Based on how end-stage she was, it sounds like its less likely the partial would be successful.



  • As a teenager, Poilievre had a job at Telus doing corporate collections by calling businesses.[16] He also later worked briefly as a journalist for Alberta Report, a conservative weekly magazine.[17]

    Neither of these are hourly jobs.

    In 2003, Poilievre founded a company called 3D Contact Inc. with business partner Jonathan Denis,[29] who became an Alberta Cabinet minister years later. Their company focused on providing political communications, polling and research services.[30] After founding the company, Poilievre ran for MP as a member of the Conservative Party of Canada, which had recently been formed from a merger the Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservatives.

    This wouldn’t be an hourly job either. The links to the source for him starting this company don’t list Poilievre as a director, or any other sign that he actually started this company, or what his role at it was. I’ve tried searching but can’t find anything else that verifies this.






  • Fair enough, but if they wind up misusing the power it won’t be long before someone makes a big stink and brings it to the human rights tribunal claiming they violate due process, and then it will be up to the courts to decide. I’d be surprised if it did, since historically our committees and groups like this tend to do less, rather than more, but it may happen.

    It won’t punish ‘free thinkers’ but it will punish those who have used online spaces as a free space to incite hatred, as it has been defined in Supreme Court hearings, which involves it being hatred targeted towards “any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or mental or physical disability.” Based on this definition, it cannot be used against those who hate Trudeau/make jokes about him for things he has or has not done, as he is not distinguished by colour, race, religion, etc.