Quote:
Originally Posted by habfanman
I'm not arguing that Canada doesn't rate highly in pretty much everything; every rich Western nation rates highly in everything. What I'm saying is that we are slipping, and slipping noticeably. Just look at you clowns, instead of saying "Hey, there's a better way to do something? We should emulate that!" You google "other country's fails" and say "Hey, they're failing in that area too so we're ok!"
So typical of Canada these days. Just wait until we become the google go to of "other country's fails". That'll be a proud day.
|
Comparing ourselves to other cities/countries is a valid way to refute criticism if the criticism itself is based on a comparison. There's a difference between saying something like "Toronto/Canada should really improve x, y, and z to make itself a better place to live" as compared to saying "Berlin, Hamburg and Amsterdam make Toronto look like a steaming heap of developing world shite."
The first statement is constructive and should not be countered by saying other places also need x, y, and z improvements since their need of improvement is irrelevant to Toronto or Canada's need for improvement. However, the second statement is not constructive and only implies that we look bad compared to other places, so if one can demonstrate that Toronto/Canada doesn't generally look bad compared to other places, the original assertion has been defeated.
Just to be clear, I'm not commenting on the accuracy of any of the things you've said. I'm just pointing out that if you want people to accept your criticism as being valid and constructive, you can not phrase it as an attack. If you do, not matter how valid the criticism may be, people will still reject it and deny it since you've said it in a way that makes them defensive. The vast majority of your comments toward Toronto - not only in this thread but in many others - have come across as attacks.rather than criticism, so it isn't surprising that people reject them.