• 9 Posts
  • 733 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: September 19th, 2023

help-circle
  • Replay of Mass Effect. I had to cheat, though, because I forgot that the Mako is mandatory to finish the Ilos level. I had to use a cheat code to spawn it just before the end. So many people have made this mistake and you can’t go back for the Mako if you left it behind, so you are soft-locked out of the ending if you don’t re-spawn it. You’d think they’d have fixed that in the Legendary Edition, but no.















  • The part I find strange is that it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with municipal affairs. I, for one, want my elected municipal officials to do municipal things, like fix roads and ensure the water treatment plant is working. I don’t particularly want them spending their time fighting an abstract battle about our Constitutional framework. Do the majority of Canadians want to revisit our Constitution and eliminate the Crown so that we are no longer a constitutional monarchy? I’m not saying that is a bad idea in principle, but I lived through the constitutional crises of 1980s and the Quebec separatism of the 1990s and it is rife with unnecessary conflict. It could literally break up the country, and almost did. I do not think that we would be better off as a republic, purely from a practical perspective. The Westminster form of government, for all of its anachronistic monarchical symbols, works well in practice.


  • Obviously monarchy is an outdated concept, but this is a strange hill to die on. The King, or The Crown, is the merely the symbol of Canada’s sovereignty. That’s it. It’s no different than Americans pledging allegiance to the flag. They are not literally pledging allegiance to a piece of cloth anymore than we are literally pledging allegiance to Charles the man. It is just symbology. Neither Charles nor the GG has any real power in Canada and if they ever tried to use their symbolic powers independently of our elected government, it would create an instant Constitutional crisis.





  • This is an interesting case and is sensible. I mean, people have to sleep somewhere.

    This is a multi-faceted problem, though. Encampments grow massively in the summer and shrink in the winter. Conversely, the shelters empty out in the summer and fill up in the winter. Why is that? It’s because many homeless people actually do have an indoor place to stay and/or access to a shelter space, but prefer to camp out when the weather is nice. I don’t blame them for that. People are handing out free tents, sleeping bags, and meals where I live. Would you rather sleep on a cot in a big room full of farting, snoring people, or in a nice private tent? However, the ruling doesn’t really apply to people’s preferences. The court ruling is about the struggle for shelter to protect oneself from the elements, not to create a right to camp wherever and whenever they want to because they feel like it.

    I’m a big believer in affordable public housing. I think we also need institutions to house people who are not capable or willing to live independently without destroying the home they are given. I’m also in favour of wet shelters for those who are hopelessly addicted to alcohol or drugs. I’m also a believer in shelters to temporarily house people who are transient or waiting to get an affordable home. I’m not a believer in allowing shanty towns to grow unchecked, nor in allowing people to camp wherever and whenever they want to. If there is a shelter bed available, they must use it and too bad about their preferences. No shanty towns. That is just plain unacceptable in a modern developed nation. And, I suspect that 95% of the Canadian population feels the same way.