CBC vs. CTV vs. Global

[333609543]

@someone123

That's precisely the problem though. We are using ridiculous "social points" to sell ourselves to our own group and none else. This needs to stop, and is also why its nearly impossible to ave a civil discussion/debate with someone who does that; not because they aren't capable but because they prefer the "easy" way out in which society becomes worse, and hurts everyone in the end. Its a reason why I think Jordan P - while I disagree with many things he's said - is helping just a little bit by discussing things with people whom he agrees and disagrees with. I picked JP because he's the most notable of a very small group.

[mistercorporate]

Both right wing extremists and leftwing nutjob s are dumber than dog sh!t. Virulent Hillary supporters are just as bad as — Trump supporters. Trump is creating an economic mess, and she would likely continue her habit of overthrowing and plunging stable countries into brutal civil wars. Trump should be ridiculed and flogged, Hillary should be hung and quartered following intense torture.

[niwell]

I tend to think the whole "civility" line being pushed by certain mainstream politicians and news sources as of late is a bit ridiculous. This can work in certain situations with non-contentious issues, but in the current climate it tends to obfuscate actual issues and nothing really gets accomplished. The cynical side of me just thinks these figures are just beginning to see the writing on the wall... Very few people are talking about actual ideas and how to bring about change, and the ones that do are beginning to see the most success. The American Democrats tend to be the worst at this, tbh. Canadian Liberals are going down that path in a bad way.

From a historical perspective the idea that societies progress (or regress) through a series of simple discussions and compromises is, well, pretty ahistorical.

[niwell]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

Both right wing extremists and leftwing nutjob s are dumber than dog sh!t. Virulent Hillary supporters are just as bad as — Trump supporters. Trump is creating an economic mess, and she would likely continue her habit of overthrowing and plunging stable countries into brutal civil wars. Trump should be ridiculed and flogged, Hillary should be hung and quartered following intense torture.

Virulent Hillary supporters tend not to fall into left or right camps, really. Post-election they have become a force unto themselves and to me exemplify the complete lack of incentive of any kind. At best maybe throwing a progressive label on things as a sop. Radical Centrism is my favourite term (kool maudit has posted about this one before).

[Boris2k7]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

Both right wing extremists and leftwing nutjob s are dumber than dog sh!t. Virulent Hillary supporters are just as bad as — Trump supporters. Trump is creating an economic mess, and she would likely continue her habit of overthrowing and plunging stable countries into brutal civil wars. Trump should be ridiculed and flogged, Hillary should be hung and quartered following intense torture.

#civility

[lio45]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

I think were in agreement then. My original quote was that "educated" immigrants are a net benefit. And I agree that uneducated ones or those from uncivilized places are often a drain.

Yeah, I was going to point out your chart totally validates Trump's comment that we need more immigrants from high-quality sources, and less immigrants from "shitholes".

The set of source countries of the immigrants on your list is not anywhere near a proportional representative sample of the source countries of all immigrants to the U.S.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by someone123

I think a lot of immigrants go where they do because of a lack of information. If you don't know a lot about a destination country you will pile into its best-known city (even if it is already super expensive), apply to the most famous schools, etc. even if better options for you might exist.

It's kind of a good news story because it means we can have a more structured and targeted system without draconian rules.

Yes, this sort of soft nudging of immigrants seems to be working. What you also see happening is once a critical mass builds in a certain place, more immigrants will end up there based on the family networks and other support systems that have taken root.

My mom's extended family is a classic example, over the decades there has been a slow but steady trickle of various distant relatives that came from overseas, and they ended up in Winnipeg because that's where the family (i.e. the people best positioned to help them) is situated for the most part. (It all stems back to a plot of farmland given to a great-great uncle many years ago... I recall my cousin pointing out one bitterly cold winter day that if that ancestor hadn't been given that plot of land a hundred years ago, that we'd all have ended up somewhere warmer...)

[someone123]

Originally Posted by niwell

Virulent Hillary supporters tend not to fall into left or right camps, really. Post-election they have become a force unto themselves and to me exemplify the complete lack of incentive of any kind. At best maybe throwing a progressive label on things as a sop. Radical Centrism is my favourite term (kool maudit has posted about this one before).

One of the interesting phenomena exemplified by American politics and media is that tiny differences between groups can be blown up into huge ideological differences.

There is very little difference between the Republicans and Democrats. I don't like Donald Trump but part of the reality of his tenure is that he hasn't done much. The US Congress hasn't done much either even though theoretically this is the time for Republicans to get their agenda through. The tax cuts were similar to something the Democrats tried to pass. Trump has been affiliated with both parties.

The politics of a country are a function of social norms and who has political power more than the elections themselves or the outcome of partisan squabbling. On a practical level if you want something done you need to apply political pressure. Merely picking the side in politics that seems slightly more aligned with you won't accomplish much if anything.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by lio45

The set of source countries of the immigrants on your list is not anywhere near a proportional representative sample of the source countries of all immigrants to the U.S.

I was listening to an interview of Satya Nadella (current CEO of Microsoft) the other day and he pointed out that a bunch of tech executives are all of Indian descent. More specifically, they all came from the same high school he went to.

There are a couple of different interpretations of this. One is that that high school must have been really good since it managed to generate so many amazing people. Another is that maybe there is an old boys' network so these people who all know each other supported each other in getting cushy jobs.

The reality is some mix of both but I am not sure what the mix is. When it comes to founders and CEOs I suspect it goes pretty far in the "old boys' club" direction (I tend to think of CEOs as something like the high priests of American capitalism; I think this is less true of, say, scientists/inventors who have objectively produced something on their own). Instead of talking about intrepid founders we're talking about who gets into the coveted spots at Stanford or Yale. Maybe it's true that whoever gets these places will end up being a CEO or founder if they're even semi-capable as an individual. That type of interpretation could create a system where we see a lot of CEOs and founders with some specific background but where that background's effect on economic development is illusory since the people are fungible and the zero-sum social privilege is all that matters.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by mistercorporate

I think were in agreement then. My original quote was that "educated" immigrants are a net benefit. And I agree that uneducated ones or those from uncivilized places are often a drain.

Not saying that it's inaccurate but the idea that there actually are "uncivilized" places inhabited by humans in the world is anathema to lots of people, and even seen as racist by some.

[Boris2k7]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Not saying that it's inaccurate but the idea that there actually are "uncivilized" places inhabited by humans in the world is anathema to lots of people, and even seen as racist by some.

Errr, well, yes. You know, "white man's burden" and all that. This is like grade school social studies stuff.

[Acajack]

I think at this point it's become pretty obvious that the left and progressives don't really care much about the little people and workers anymore, and that the feeling is mutual. As such we're in the middle of a long, drawn out political divorce between the previously bethrothed, that makes the collapse of the white Southern Democrat base last century look as banal as Danny Zucco abandoning the T-Birds to letter in track.

The problem for these battlers and working stiffs is that they don't have anywhere to go - at least not anywhere where they're liable to get any tangible assistance.

Guys like Trump and Ford are mostly playing them for fools for political gain IMHO.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Boris2k7

Errr, well, yes. You know, "white man's burden" and all that. This is like grade school social studies stuff.

Not getting it.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Not saying that it's inaccurate but the idea that there actually are "uncivilized" places inhabited by humans in the world is anathema to lots of people, and even seen as racist by some.

Some people behead gays on sight, others let them marry; everyone out there is equally civilized, we just all have our own way of doing things.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by lio45

Some people behead gays on sight, others let them marry; everyone out there is equally civilized, we just all have our own way of doing things.

In other threads, you've actually shown yourself to be quite open to letting the peoples of the world do their own thing!

[niwell]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think at this point it's become pretty obvious that the left and progressives don't really care much about the little people and workers anymore, and that the feeling is mutual. As such we're in the middle of a long, drawn out political divorce between the previously bethrothed, that makes the collapse of the white Southern Democrat base last century look as banal as Danny Zucco abandoning the T-Birds to letter in track.

The problem for these battlers and working stiffs is that they don't have anywhere to go - at least not anywhere where they're liable to get any tangible assistance.

Guys like Trump and Ford are mostly playing them for fools for political gain IMHO.

As I hinted at before I think there is a bit of a sea-change coming on the left. One that we haven't seen much of in Canada yet, despite the fact we actually have a social democratic party. Or maybe because we do and it mostly acts like "second place at best".

Thinking of figures like Corbyn and Ocasio-Cortez (Bernie to a lesser extent). Maybe even Obrador in Mexico. To a certain extent the Ontario Liberals attempted a shift but were too deeply unlikable and ingrained as part of the "political elite" it didn't really work.

[Docere]

Joel Harden in Ottawa if you want a Canadian example.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by niwell

As I hinted at before I think there is a bit of a sea-change coming on the left. One that we haven't seen much of in Canada yet, despite the fact we actually have a social democratic party. Or maybe because we do and it mostly acts like "second place at best".

I hope this happens. Canadian politics are so stale.

I think part of the problem with the NDP is that they are beholden to special interest groups that are somewhat incompatible. We have the old unions that are often at odds with younger people and environmentalists, yet are only a middling political force these days.


https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11-630-x/11-630-x2015005-eng.htm

I guess it's not trivial to turn goals into a coherent platform but no party is doing a good job of promoting a good standard of living for working class people. Labour laws are outdated, housing costs are too high, infrastructure investment too low, etc. These issues are mostly unrelated to the most talked about political issues in the media.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think at this point it's become pretty obvious that the left and progressives don't really care much about the little people and workers anymore, and that the feeling is mutual. As such we're in the middle of a long, drawn out political divorce between the previously bethrothed, that makes the collapse of the white Southern Democrat base last century look as banal as Danny Zucco abandoning the T-Birds to letter in track.

The problem for these battlers and working stiffs is that they don't have anywhere to go - at least not anywhere where they're liable to get any tangible assistance.

Guys like Trump and Ford are mostly playing them for fools for political gain IMHO.

In the US context, this is definitely true for the main stream "centrist left" which progressives often refer to as the corporatists. But absolutely not true for the progressives. In fact, this is one of the major differentiating factor between the corporatist and the progressives and something that progressive groups such as the Justice Democrats constantly attack the corporatists on. There's been a lot of debate among the progressive camp as to whether it's more worthwhile to stay and fight for change in the Democratic party, or if their energy would be better spent on building a new one.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by niwell

As I hinted at before I think there is a bit of a sea-change coming on the left. One that we haven't seen much of in Canada yet, despite the fact we actually have a social democratic party. Or maybe because we do and it mostly acts like "second place at best".

Thinking of figures like Corbyn and Ocasio-Cortez (Bernie to a lesser extent). Maybe even Obrador in Mexico. To a certain extent the Ontario Liberals attempted a shift but were too deeply unlikable and ingrained as part of the "political elite" it didn't really work.

Not sure there's much that distinguishes AMLO from all the other left-wing Latin American populists we've seen over the years.