Random Conversations

[NOWINYOW]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

First of all I will give you 10-1 odds on any amount of money we aren't spending 5% of GDP on defence in 2035 or ever outside of a full scale war.

Secondly, not spending over the past 20 years means we have a lot less debt and therefore are more able to invest not less able to invest now. It's the spending that matters not the increase. It's not like you didn't paint your house for 20 years. It's more like you didn't heat your pool for 20 years and now you are committing to heating it even in the dead of winter.

Not necessarily. Had we stuck to our committed requirement of GDP spend there are plenty of shiny objects our gov'ts did spend on, mostly to get elected or re-elected, that wasn't necessary or prudent.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by NOWINYOW

Not necessarily. Had we stuck to our committed requirement of GDP spend there are plenty of shiny objects our gov'ts did spend on, mostly to get elected or re-elected, that wasn't necessary or prudent.

I suppose you mean if we had increased defence spending instead of cutting GST and Liberal spending on things like dental care and CCB we wouldn't have such a heavy lift. This is probably correct but not sure that is a better allocation for Canadians.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by ponyboycurtis

My understanding from an article I came across yesterday that part of our spending percentage could be accounted for by mining "essential minerals" in some type of trade deal with our allies.

Exactly. The 5% of GDP figure is actually 3.5% for core military spending + 1.5% for defence-related infrastructure, over the next 10 years. That 1.5% could get us a lot of roads to critical mineral mines, new or upgraded airports and port facilities, icebreakers, etc... all things we need to spend on anyway.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-agrees-five-percent-gdp-defence-spending-1.7570191

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

Exactly. The 5% of GDP figure is actually 3.5% for core military spending + 1.5% for defence-related infrastructure, over the next 10 years. That 1.5% could get us a lot of roads to critical mineral mines, new or upgraded airports and port facilities, icebreakers, etc... all things we need to spend on anyway.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-agrees-five-percent-gdp-defence-spending-1.7570191

The mention of icebreakers reminds me of something. It is said that most countries consider their coast guard to be part of their military spending while we have not. We surely will in future add it to our military spending.

Canada needs new ice breakers, The US needs to replace aging ones as does Finland. These three nations have entered into an agreement to partner on building them.

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-services...roduce-arctic-and-polar-icebreakers.html

This government article does not mention that the best steel hulls for ice breakers are made at a shipyard in Finland. The main client for these hulls used to be Russia. NATO sanctions put an end to that. A Canadian consortium then bought the company that makes the hulls. This leads to interesting possibilities for Canada. Also, I wonder about how Trump's steel tariffs will affect the cost of the ice breakers that the US needs?

[NOWINYOW]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I suppose you mean if we had increased defence spending instead of cutting GST and Liberal spending on things like dental care and CCB we wouldn't have such a heavy lift. This is probably correct but not sure that is a better allocation for Canadians.

This is only looking at the shiny objects. I no longer have dental insurance, I asked my Dentist about this new dental care program. He said they don't accept claims with it. Nor do, according to him, many other dentists. There's been waste of 10's of billions of dollars over the decades. People and MSM only seem to get upset over $16.00 glasses of orange juice. Don't get me wrong, no public servant should be billing taxpayers for an extravagance like that, but lets not forget the billions more spent and wasted. Liberal, Conservative and NDP Gov'ts alike.

[AuxTown]

Originally Posted by NOWINYOW

This is only looking at the shiny objects. I no longer have dental insurance, I asked my Dentist about this new dental care program. He said they don't accept claims with it. Nor do, according to him, many other dentists. There's been waste of 10's of billions of dollars over the decades. People and MSM only seem to get upset over $16.00 glasses of orange juice. Don't get me wrong, no public servant should be billing taxpayers for an extravagance like that, but lets not forget the billions more spent and wasted. Liberal, Conservative and NDP Gov'ts alike.

Universal dental care was never going to work. It's just too expensive. They should have focused on dental check-ups and basic dental work for all kids and left it there. All the dentists I know would be taking at least a 50% pay cut if they provide publicly sponsored dental care, sadly.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by NOWINYOW

He said they don't accept claims with it. Nor do, according to him, many other dentists.

How many do, though? (Hint: he's in the small and dwindling minority of dental clinics who are being d!cks about this.)

[harls]

Originally Posted by AuxTown

All the dentists I know would be taking at least a 50% pay cut if they provide publicly sponsored dental care, sadly.

How is that? Genuine question. Doesn't this program fulfill their salaries? Or are you telling me a 1200 dollar crown really isn't worth 1200 bucks?

[NOWINYOW]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

How many do, though? (Hint: he's in the small and dwindling minority of dental clinics who are being d!cks about this.)

I don't know how many. What's the number? What's the percentage?

[NOWINYOW]

Originally Posted by harls

How is that? Genuine question. Doesn't this program fulfill their salaries? Or are you telling me a 1200 dollar crown really isn't worth 1200 bucks?

A few months ago I looked at the Gov't website about this plan and from what I could see crowns were not covered.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by NOWINYOW

I don't know how many. What's the number? What's the percentage?

About 70% of Canadian dental practices now accept the federal plan, and that number keeps growing.

[urbanforest]

Over 90% of oral health providers (dentists, dental hygienists, denturists, etc) are participating in the federal plan as of December. As of a month ago, that number is 25,668 providers in real terms.

That's like, 4.5 times the number of Tim Hortons locations in Canada.

Originally Posted by NOWINYOW

I asked my Dentist about this new dental care program. He said they don't accept claims with it. Nor do, according to him, many other dentists.

I think your dentist is full of shit, and I think it's time to dump them.

[lrt's friend]

My dentist is on the federal plan. He has had a practice for many years so a good portion of his patients are seniors.

[Richard Eade]

The other night I went on the Haunted Walk of Ottawa. It was fun, and interesting, but not very ‘chilling’ (apart from the outdoor temperature). I have been on Haunted Walks in many other places that were much more detailed in their descriptions of the deaths and specters – so this one is good for the faint of heart and children.

Anyway, one of the stops was at the old Normal School – Ottawa Teachers’ College – Historic Wing of Ottawa City Hall. This was the first time that I noticed the dents, and associated plaques, on the door facing Elgin. The plaques seem to date when a collection of three/four dents were made in the door by ‘The Freedom Ottawa’. (Or ‘The Ottawa Freedom’, I can’t remember which.) There are several dent clusters with plaques, and the date that I read were relatively recent – every few years, between 2002 and 2014.

I know that there are some on this site that are very familiar with the history of Ottawa (including recent history). Would they have any idea as to what the markings in the door are about? (Google didn’t provide any insight, so I am forced to actually ask PEOPLE.)

[ponyboycurtis]

They have once again torn up the William st. mall.

I want to say this is the 3rd time since they renovated it. At least partially 3 times for sure. They still had the asphalt in the middle section where they dont bother putting the grates back.

I find this annoying and I would imagine the businesses clinging onto the last clutches of summer do too.

[J.OT13]

I don't understand why it's so hard. We've been living in this climate for 400 years. Figure it out!

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I don't understand why it's so hard. We've been living in this climate for 400 years. Figure it out!

Here, I'll help:

STOP USING FRIGGING PAVERS.

[harls]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Here, I'll help:

STOP USING FRIGGING PAVERS.

The paving stone mafia would like to have a word.

[Aylmer]

I think the problem is less the pavers, and more the lack of any standardisation.

In the Netherlands (yes yes, I know), basically all the pavers across the country are the same dimension and material, and municipalities keep stockpiles of them to quickly replace a broken brick. It's actually amazing to see how they do street and sidewalk repairs - two guys show up with a dozen bricks and a hammer and just remove the broken or worn out ones, and tap in a fresh one to replace it. It's all done in a matter of minutes. Even the worn-out ones get a second life as pavers in lower-speed or pedestrian areas where a bit of texture isn't a terrible thing. In historical areas, it even adds to the character to have these bricks that look ancient, but are actually just 20-30 year-old bricks from other streets.

Our problem is that all the pavers are custom and therefore very expensive (if indeed possible) to acquire, and there's no internal expertise that's developed to send people out to replace them. So when a paver breaks, it's just left there to deteriorate. And because there's not spare pavers that are compatible with it, it just gets covered in asphalt until such time as there are enough broken pavers to warrant an RFP to acquire a large quantity of them. And all the replaced pavers are just thrown out presumably.

Pavers are actually a wonderful, cheap technology. Like any technology, it can be implemented stupidly. But that's more a comment on the City of Ottawa than the merits of pavers.

• Video Link

[ponyboycurtis]

For sure... the problem is, when you have one paver that is damaged in some way that goes unaddressed for a length of time it ends up causing damage to all the ones around it and so on.