If that was it, only people who break rules would speed. Speeding is a structural problem from the design of cars which accelerate fast and have top speeds as high as double the highest legal died limit, and roads which are designed to be comfortably driven WAY faster than the posted speed limit. Most people speed. The roads are designed for you to speed on. The cars are designed to speed with. Long commutes and traffic to go to an underpaid job mean people are driving at their most frustrated state.

I don’t disagree, but the problem is that people are terrible judges of how fast they can react and terrible judges of risk. Tailgating is a major cause of vehicle accidents, and is purely an individual failing. Leaving enough space between the car in front of you and yourself (a well known guideline of 3s in clear weather) is your responsibility and yours alone. Don’t care if you’re tired, angry, emotional, whatever. If you are getting behind the wheel of a 2+ tonne machine, you need to be responsible for that. Unfortunately most people aren’t.

We can argue and disagree on the factors at play, but fundamentally, I don’t agree with your thought process where ALL responsibility is offloaded from the individual to a large, faceless entity of ‘society’. For sure, many people are not being set up to succeed and be safe while driving, and most shouldn’t need to drive at all. I agree - push more bike lanes, push more transit, get trains to actually run alongside major highways to remove single-car commuting vehicles that destroy our environment.

But how can you be claiming that any action taken to slow the deaths and injuries happening by enforcing speed limits is counterproductive action?

40% of speeding drivers involved in fatal crashes are 16-24 years old. 75% of pedestrian fatalities occured on urban, high density roads like those Ontario is in the middle of putting speeding cameras onto. When you consider that pedestrians hit at ~30km/hr has a 5% chance of death, while those hit at 45km/hr has a 45%, and those hit at 60km/hr are at 85% chance of death, there is a very serious argument to be made to enforce 40 and 50km/hr speed limits. By slowing people from 70km/hr to 50km/hr, we can drastically improve the safety of pedestrians and cyclists using the road or sidewalks. In community safety zones with 40km/hr speed limits, enforcing them can increase chance of survival by 40%. Add into that the enormous benefit we would see from a healthcare standpoint when you no longer need to provide care (or provide as serious of care) for accident victims?

How can you be arguing AGAINST speed cameras instead of calling for their implementation everywhere and demanding that funding be reallocated for decarbonization and street redesign? The funding those can pull in is enormous, and as compliance increases, street reconstruction can provide the further increase in fatality reduction.

https://www.radarsign.com/traffic-calming-stats/ https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/811090

As people have commented on all these posts since the incident appeared, we have no info on the incident.

Could be evidence of assault above and beyond that required for self defense (injuries to the intruders back, for example, from him attempting to run away, or signs of the fight continuing from inside to the exterior). Generally self defense is accepted with a good degree of latitude in Canada/(would love to find any examples of cases where someone defended themselves appropriately yet were convicted) , but obvious attacks that aren’t self defense still are assault.

Anecdotally, I work for a consulting firm that verifies the development designs on behalf of the municipalities just north of GTA.

At least four big (<1000acre sites) developments have all been paused indefinitely due to the house prices decreasing. Big developers - TACC, Madison, Wynstar.

Almost like Fords pushes aren’t the things needed to get construction done

And water is even less elastic than electricity. Municipal pipe leaks in your neighborhood will have a bigger impact on your street’s water consumption rate than any amount of conservation or efficiency within the home.

Civil engineer who works with municipalities on repairing pipe infrastrucure. I’m in Canada, so YMMV, but they’re ON it with leaking pipes. We’re typically brought in to design new watermains when the old ones reach ~5-10% leakage.

If you don’t like anecdotal evidence, here’s a paper from 2000- This was at the start of when municipalities began examining for this, and even then they only found losses of 20-30%. A personal reduction of 20-30% isn’t that hard.

https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2008/nrc-cnrc/NR25-2-40E.pdf

I try to look past party and focus on the policy by itself - in this case I agree. If the EVs can meet Canadian safety standards, let them in. The cost of EVs is the biggest factor preventing their widespread adoption.

Wow, I didn’t hear that’s all they agreed to. There must be other benefits CUPE got, because that’s what AC was offering BEFORE the strike…

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/what-is-ground-pay-1.7611420

Depends - the area you see as vacation property is an area that people live in, unless its on seasonal roads only, or water access only.

I live in an area where vacationers from a big city come out and cottage here. Often its a family cottage they’ve been coming to for decades, so I don’t really have a problems with them renting.

But through covid tons of people from the city bought cottages and drove homeowning out of the grasp of any locals. These are full, four season structures on roads serviced by the township. The average housing price ~doubled, and most locals can’t buy.

If people aren’t using the cottage so often that they can rent it out regularly, then I don’t have a problem with them having to give it up or be more heavily regulated.

Guessing its the extra inspections/requirements for these rentals to meet codes that he’s grumbling about - a likely sign his septic is undersized, or there’s a safety concern that would be expensive to fix.

Don’t know about your area, but in ours its Conservation Authorities who map flood plains. Theirs are pretty well updated from my experience working with them.

Lol really? So no, no examples.

Federally, there’s only been 7 examples in your timeline - https://lop.parl.ca/sites/ParlInfo/default/en_CA/legislation/backToWork

I’ll do some digging then. Going to the wikipedia page for Canadian labour movements, and starting from current day:

Canada post union used the same loophole as here and is currently being challenged in court.

Federal workers strike was not legislated back.

Kimikat Foundry was properly legislated back, BUT was only required at 25% capacity. To me, a reasonable compromise, as the foundry would still be losing tons of money at 25% but not be shuttered.

2018 CUPW strike was sent back with the same loophole as here.

2012 Halifax Transit Strike actually had the PM say this: "Nova Scotia Premier Darrell Dexter won’t discuss the possibility of back-to-work legislation.

“Any discussion of this on either side actually upsets the balance that is there between the city and their workers. They have a situation that they need to deal with and I encourage them both to deal with it,” he said."

2008 TTC was legislated back under Dalton McGuinty.

2004 PSAC strike was legislated back

1997 teachers strike in Ontario the government attempted to get an injunction against the strike, and the judge refused on the grounds it would violate their charter right to strike.

Feel free to add any others that I missed, but this is hardly “life as normal” and should definitely be challenged and fought

I’d be interested in seeing some of those cases that

a) Aren’t using this loophole the libs decided to make that has yet to be fought in a court of law (ie did not require the passing of legislation to force them back)

b) Aren’t for a service deemed ‘critical’ like teachers, nurses, etc. (ie ones that dont have an ESA)

For those who haven’t come across it, read this post. Its absolute BS the way the Libs have twisted this section of the code to suit the interests of big businesses, and the reason we have seen this happen so much in the last few years, but not previously.

https://lemmy.ca/post/49942361

Definitely not true. Point of insurance isn’t for small bumps or accidents <10k. Its helpful for that, but not really the intention. I use a 5k deductible, because I probably wouldn’t claim damage below that anyway.

Point of insurance is for catastrophic, life changing injuries, or car being totaled. Ontario lowered the legally allowed minimums for a bunch of the (super important, but rarely used) categories in an effort to lower auto insurance prices a few years ago.

Accident benefits are now 65k default. Optional coverage is like 50$/yr to increase to 1mil. If you have any serious injuries that require more than a few months of rehab (ie back injuries, serious physio for rehab, etc) then you will need the mil. This also covers things like attendant care, if you’re at home and need help with things like showering, cleaning the house, etc. 65k vanishes SO fast.

Make sure, if you don’t have good LTD through work OR you don’t have a good emergency fund, that you top up your income replacement to match your current income. I added 1k/wk income replacement for like 25$/yr.

Optional catastrophic impairment is another clause you should add. Default is 2mil, but if youre actually catastrophically impaired, you’ll need the 3mil unless you have family that can fully support you. Again, its 11$/yr for me.

Insurance shouldn’t be used as a ‘oops, I got in a fender bender and its 5k to fix’. That shit is going to get your rates jacked up cause insurance companies suck. Its in case you serious get fucked up and derail the rest of your life, and in that case you want to make damn sure you have good insurance that will cover you.

Thanks for posting! Super interesting to read more background about the back to work legislating they’ve been doing.

Disappointed, but in no way am I surprised. Liberals have made their name by being corporatists at the expense of the workers for a long time now.

Lol good. Its about time that the govt be reminded that mandating a return to work should only be used as a last resort, and shouldn’t be something that they can force on any group, any time that they want.

Fuck Carney and his corporate boot-licking. 12 hours into a strike for a non-critical industry? Get that bullshit out of here.

MPs make~ 200,000/yr in 2024. In comparison, they made 18,000/yr in 1963, which is roughly 180,000/yr. Seems close enough I’m not gonna argue they’re ridiculously overpaid, unless you’re arguing they’ve always been overpaid.

MPP in Ontario is at $157,350. Used to be $37,800 in 1980, or $140,000 today. Again, that’s pretty close considering MPPs have had their pay well frozen well below that since early 2010s until this year.

Median income of Canadian families has stayed pretty flat - only source I can find is a publication from govt of Canada in 2005, but they have 1980 household income at $59,709 (in 2005 dollars), $66,343 in 2005, and $ 95,200 in 2021, ($68,614 in 2005 dollars).

So again, pretty steady.

We’ve got lots of issues, but the idea that this is caused by overpaying municipal staff is ridiculous. The actual problem is that these kinds of things aren’t budgeted out properly when constructed. They have the money to build them, not realizing it costs a lot to keep them going, especially when these large repairs are required. I work as an engineering consultant, primarily for municipalities, but an easy example are stormwater ponds. Those ponds in most subdivisions? They’re there to trap sediment and pollutants to keep it out of streams and lakes.

Tons were constructed from the 80s through to today, paid originally by the developers, but the Town has to maintain them, otherwise all those pollutants wind up in the streams and rivers.

Provincial govt did an audit a few years ago and found that less than 10% of them had been cleaned since they were installed. They’re about $1mil per cleanout, and no one had budgeted for it when setting property taxes.

Multiply this by all the other municipal infrastructure we rely on, and its easy to see why things are fucked.

What roles do you think are insane salaries?

if i recall, it was a concession made by elder Trudeau to get provinces to sign off on the charter at all.

Its a piece of the charter of rights and freedoms that allows the government to ignore the charter of rights and freedoms, despite the judicial system declaring a law unconstitutional.

Its required to be re-applied every 5 years.

Since it was created, it is worth noting, its been used a handful of times, and only ever by provincial governments. It has almost exclusively been used by the conservative party through those years.

What proof you have he will? He has given no indication of it, and it is currently canceled.