Federal Government & Politics II

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

The schools ran through to the late 1980s (the last one closed in 1997), and their numbers peaked in the late 1960s. Don't try to brush them off as "19th century schools", they were around for the vast majority of the 20th century. The Sixties Scoop isn't from the 1860s, it's from the 1960s.

The unmarked graves people are talking about are from the 19th century.

[Loco101]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There are way more who aren't extreme for sure, as only a small minority truly have extreme views.

Though I wouldn't say that most or even many aren't religious. To be Muslim in 2024 is to be fairly religious. If you're not, you're not Muslim. It's not like being Catholic in 2024.

In almost any religion the extremists will not consider less religious people to be part of that religion. And a fair number of the religious spokespeople give an inaccurate portrayal of the people of the religion they are supposed to represent.

I really can't stand religious extremists no matter what the religion.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The unmarked graves people are talking about are from the 19th century.

Do you have any proof of this? Residential schools operated until 1997; you're telling me that every child that died in a residential school from 1900 to 1997 ended up in a marked grave?

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

The schools ran through to the late 1980s (the last one closed in 1997), and their numbers peaked in the late 1960s. Don't try to brush them off as "19th century schools", they were around for the vast majority of the 20th century. The Sixties Scoop isn't from the 1860s, it's from the 1960s.

The number of residential schools peaked in 1931, at 80 schools nationally. And while the last of those schools technically closed in 1997, it's important to note that starting in the 1970s, most were closed and the remainder were transferred from church control to local bands and/or transitioned to day schools - so not entirely comparable to their earlier iterations. What we generally think when we hear of "residential schools" today (ie. kids forcibly taken from their parents, schools rife with abuse & unsanitary conditions) had largely ended by the early 70s.

All of this isn't to say that there weren't still abuses happening at these schools throughout the 20th century, but the mortality rate at least was much lower. The vast majority of deaths within residential schools happened before 1950.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadi...ortality_rates

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

It's a response to the "I am not aware of a single grave that has been found at any residential school in Canada" statement. They've found unmarked graves near the former Blue Quills residential school site, and they've found what they believe to be a mass grave.

Not sure if you meant to distort my comment, however my statement was directly related to Warren12C's comment about the anomolies. Your examples related to formal cemetaries, mine was towards the anomolies that the media (and the federal gov't) jumped on as being "mass graves".

As such, I will clarify my assertion; To date I am not aware of a single anomoly that was found by ground penetrating radar, since 2021, that inflamed national and international media about mass graves related to residential schools, has resulted in the discovery of human remains.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

They've found unmarked graves near the former Blue Quills residential school site, and they've found what they believe to be a mass grave.

Unmarked graves in a 100+ year old cemetary happens more frequently than you'd expect. And no mass grave has been found. The band is planning to doing some excavation, LINK, so in the future there may be evidence, but for now, nothing has been confirmed. And somewhat related, Hamilton has "mass graves" resulting from Cholera/Spanish Flu outbreaks LINK. So it should not be unexpeted that a "mass grave" is found in Quill Lake relating to a typhoid outbreak as that appears to have been the norm back then - even for non-Indians.

Again, let's focus on the issues that we know happened without making stuff up. You do realize that by moving the goal posts (mass graves!!!) actually makes the matter worse as when there are none found, denialists will then use that to distract the entire issue around residential schools.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Loco101

In almost any religion the extremists will not consider less religious people to be part of that religion. And a fair number of the religious spokespeople give an inaccurate portrayal of the people of the religion they are supposed to represent.

I really can't stand religious extremists no matter what the religion.

Sure but my point is more that "Muslims who aren't very religious" isn't really a thing in Muslim countries so they can't be predominant among Muslims moving to Canada.

Yes there are some people who move from these countries who then refer to themselves as former Muslims or ex-Muslims.

Sorry if that sounds like nitpicking but there is a difference.

According to the sharia the penalty for apostasy is death is it not?

[shreddog]

if PMJT and LPC aren't popular, it must be someone's fault ...

PMO officials worry Freeland’s economic messaging has been ineffective as party struggles
...
Senior officials in Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s office are concerned that Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland has not been effective in delivering an upbeat economic message as the Liberal government struggles to reconnect with Canadians amid low approval ratings, sources say.
...
...
Two sources say the view of some senior officials within the PMO, including chief of staff Katie Telford, is that Ms. Freeland has been ineffective in selling the government’s economic policies that have come under assault from Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre.

Other criticism includes that Ms. Freeland is not doing enough to win over members of the Liberal caucus, the sources say.

LINK

So it's her fault!

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by shreddog

if PMJT and LPC aren't popular, it must be someone's fault ...
LINK

So it's her fault!

Freeland is dogmatic, persistent and exhausting, which worked well with the trade negotiations with the US.

She is also not a natural campaigner, definitely a cold fish, not naturally likeable and certainly not a huckster.

This is why she would be a disaster as Liberal Party leader, and, she would most certainly not be a viable replacement for JT (when he finally realizes there is a speeding bullet train barrelling down the track heading directly for him).

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Freeland is dogmatic, persistent and exhausting, which worked well with the trade negotiations with the US.

She is also not a natural campaigner, definitely a cold fish, not naturally likeable and certainly not a huckster.

This is why she would be a disaster as Liberal Party leader, and, she would most certainly not be a viable replacement for JT (when he finally realizes there is a speeding bullet train barrelling down the track heading directly for him).

Yes. It seemed clear Trudeau wanted her to suceed him. He wanted a female Prime Minister to be part of his legacy. Which is kind of sexist or at least paternalistic if you think about it but the woke crowd doesn't see things that way.

This divergence seems interesting. Is she trying to push him out? Or just genuine fatigue with her? Pushing her out sends a message to everyone else. I wonder if it backfires though. The other leadership candidates are rightly confident they can beat her so making her a martyr could be a successful strategy. The leadership prize isn't worth that much but if you get it in the fall you get to be PM for at least a year and elections can always turn around.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Yes. It seemed clear Trudeau wanted her to suceed him. He wanted a female Prime Minister to be part of his legacy. Which is kind of sexist or at least paternalistic if you think about it but the woke crowd doesn't see things that way.

This divergence seems interesting. Is she trying to push him out? Or just genuine fatigue with her? Pushing her out sends a message to everyone else. I wonder if it backfires though. The other leadership candidates are rightly confident they can beat her so making her a martyr could be a successful strategy. The leadership prize isn't worth that much but if you get it in the fall you get to be PM for at least a year and elections can always turn around.

I just think she is unable to polish the Trudeau economic turd, which isn’t her fault, Moses couldn’t sell that shit if it was dictated by a burning bush. She has the charisma of a shovel, but she has worked for major financial publications and is a Rhodes scholar, she almost certainly knows the economic policy she is supposed to sell is garbage.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I just think she is unable to polish the Trudeau economic turd, which isn’t her fault, Moses couldn’t sell that shit if it was dictated by a burning bush. She has the charisma of a shovel, but she has worked for major financial publications and is a Rhodes scholar, she almost certainly knows the economic policy she is supposed to sell is garbage.

I get the impression a lot of the economic policy comes from her. Depending on what you mean by Liberal economic policy. All the boutique supports for the poor. Capital Gains tax increase. Destruction of extractive investment. Battery plant subsidies. She is on board with all of that I am sure. If you mean supporting house prices to benefit boomers at the expense of FTHB well sure but politically we all know that is suicide.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I get the impression a lot of the economic policy comes from her. Depending on what you mean by Liberal economic policy. All the boutique supports for the poor. Capital Gains tax increase. Destruction of extractive investment. Battery plant subsidies. She is on board with all of that I am sure. If you mean supporting house prices to benefit boomers at the expense of FTHB well sure but politically we all know that is suicide.

I doubt it, budget decisions are made by PMO. Finance Minister might get the odd pet project.

[Marshsparrow]

Guess it didn't go so well for Pierre this morning, and apparently Pierre was the only one to escape out a back door...

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/poil...gacy-1.6959511

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Guess it didn't go so well for Pierre this morning, and apparently Pierre was the only one to escape out a back door...

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/poil...gacy-1.6959511

FNs are also pissed off with JT. What's your point?

At least PP didn't blow any smoke up their asses. Nothing "performative" in his presentation at all..............

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I doubt it, budget decisions are made by PMO. Finance Minister might get the odd pet project.

But I thought we are in a fiscal mess because she doesn't have a financial background? (Not you but a common comment)

I have no idea but I bet the Capital gains tax came from her office. Maybe with a general direction to tax the rich more but the specifics seem Min Finance.

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

FNs are also pissed off with JT. What's your point?

At least PP didn't blow any smoke up their asses. Nothing "performative" in his presentation at all..............

The text of the speech wasn't but saying he will adress descrimination in the child wefare system and other issues seems a bit "performative".

We know he probaly doesn't plan on adressing other issues they raised.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

But I thought we are in a fiscal mess because she doesn't have a financial background? (Not you but a common comment)

We’re in a fiscal mess because the decisions that have been made are stupid, whether or not the people making them had pieces of paper saying they studied economics earlier in their lives is irrelevant.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

FNs are also pissed off with JT. What's your point?

PP’s party just won in a Toronto red stronghold, one would have to be extraordinarily biased (Marshsparrow) to refuse to see it's going well for PP, not the other way around.

2025-2029 is going to be a very long four years for Marshsparrow

[Tvisforme]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

....Which is kind of sexist or at least paternalistic if you think about it....

If you actually think about it, it's not.

[casper]

Originally Posted by lio45

PP’s party just won in a Toronto red stronghold, one would have to be extraordinarily biased (Marshsparrow) to refuse to see it's going well for PP, not the other way around.

2025-2029 is going to be a very long four years for Marshsparrow

It did not go well for him. Not a shocker. The Conservatives don't have a rational plan that will address indigenous community asks and at the same time be acceptable to the natural resources community (company and its workers) that he is trying to address. If has to pick, it is clear how that is going to come down.

Will he lose this battle? Yes. Will he win the war and form government? Probably. Yes, it will be a long four years. The good news it will give time for the Liberals to regroup and come back stronger after.