And so, when a narrative emerged from corporate media and analysts that Trudeau had to go because he had moved too far to the left, I did a spit take: What in the universe are they talking about?

The members of Parliament (MPs) who made this claim mostly spoke under a cloak of anonymity. Global News’ David Akin reported, “Almost all of the MPs Global News spoke to believe Trudeau has moved the party too far to the left and that shift has played a key role in the decline of the Liberals.” Akin didn’t say who or explain how these MPs were defining “the left.”

How can it be that a prime minister whose tenure saw record-breaking corporate performance paired with widening social inequality is also “too far to the left”? What kind of left-wing doctrine supports extreme income inequality and a tax structure that has failed to redistribute profits?

No one could reasonably believe that Trudeau’s economic policy was too far to the left. What they’re really saying is that Trudeau’s vibes were too far to the left.

https://mastodon.world/@BrianJopek/113816404576409938

In the worst region, bordering BC and the Yukon, extreme conditions increased by 1.8 days every year over two decades.

The labour board rules workers in different locations can bargain toward one contract covering them all.

Journalism in Canada is at its lowest ebb in decades, as evidenced by the cancellation or pausing of several post-secondary programs in the subject due to the dismal job market.

Postmedia Network, Canada’s largest newspaper chain by far, is 98 per cent owned by U.S. hedge funds and has had to sell assets and lay off workers to make payments on the hundreds of millions in company debt the vulture capitalists also hold. The corporation has steadily tightened its grip on Canadian newspapers since its creation in 2010, buying: Sun Media, Canada’s second-largest chain at the time, in 2015; Brunswick News, the chain that monopolizes New Brunswick, in 2022; and SaltWire, the chain that dominates the rest of the Maritimes, earlier this year.

Canada’s current second-largest chain, Torstar, was taken over in 2020 by private equity firm NordStar Capital, which has been stripping its assets and eviscerating its workforce. Last year, it converted 71 Ontario community newspapers published by its Metroland subsidiary to online-only publications, laying off more than 600 workers in the process. It then cheated them out of the severance pay they were owed by taking advantage of our bankruptcy laws.

Our broadcasting industry isn’t in much better shape,...

Gina Rinehart, an Australian worth $30 billion and an avid Donald Trump supporter, has changed Alberta’s politics in her relentless pursuit of mined coal.

The saga offers more evidence on how the wealthy exercise their raw financial power to engineer democracy for their own economic benefit. Political scientists call the oversized influence of billionaires “the wealthification” of politics. Witness how billionaires dominated the U.S. presidential election.

In the last three years she has repeatedly sued the Alberta and federal governments and challenged regulatory processes. And even though three separate courts have found her arguments baseless and without merit, she continues to sue.

Two outstanding lawsuits, for example, contend the Alberta government owes her billions because her mining plans were stymied. Overwhelming public opposition to coal mining forced the government to impose a coal moratorium in the Rockies to protect critical watersheds.

Outside of provincial and federal courts, Rinehart has hired two lobby firms with ties to the United Conservative Party government to actively promote her open-pit mining project.

When it became clear that citizens living in the municipal district of Ranchland, where Rinehart wants to build the mega-mine, were overwhelmingly opposed to its construction, Rinehart actively participated in a dubious referendum sanctioned by Smith in the neighbouring community of Crowsnest Pass. Rinehart’s company even drove voters to the polls.

Name an animal (or several) you like and mention why you like it. No wrong answers!

TIL. I knew there were many vegetarians in India. I just learned that that vegetarianism excludes chicken eggs, which as a North American caught me off-guard. I looked at a couple webpages, which means I'm an expert on the topic now /s

https://www.thejuggernaut.com/eggetarianism-india-eggs-vegetarianism

Many assume that India is a country of vegetarians, but that’s miles from the truth: 69% of Indians eat meat, and about 23% are egg eaters. Of this latter group, 9% identify as “eggetarians,” or vegetarians who eat eggs.

https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/2601/why-are-eggs-not-consumed-by-many-hindus

Moral Reason: I have been taught that one reason such eggs are not considered suitable for consumption is that by preventing fertilization you are preventing the birth of an animal, which is considered unjust by some. The reasoning here is that blockading the creation of life is similar if not equal to extinguishing it.

Vedic Reason: According to Wikipedia's article on Sattvic diet, an unfertilized egg is considered Rajasic, or overly stimulating. Such foods are not to be consumed as they lead to an unfit state of mind.

Editorial on (still) wearing a COVID mask By Senator Paula Simons. Good read