The "LOLCANADA" thread...again

But if you actually ARE any of those things, you should absolutely be called out for it. By name.

And spare me with the "lefties are the ones calling righties names"... righties act so tough and are so marshmallowy soft it's hilarious.

You have a very short imagination. You probably say he or she dozens of times a day. For example "I spoke to Mary and she told me this hilarious story". You don't use pronouns when speaking directly to someone, you use pronouns when talking about the person. Or in situations where you don't know the gender the singular they like "Don't forget to ask the doctor what they think about your wart!".

I do this probably every work day. At work one of my closest colleagues is non-binary. So if we are at daily coffee I might say "oh they told me this story earlier". As does everyone else. It's literally zero big deal. If you've never interacted with a non-binary or trans person and had reason to do this it probably takes about 3 tries of being a bit awkward until it feels totally natural and you don't think about it anymore. If you are really struggling you can endlessly say Mary Mary Mary and never use pronouns ever, but in every day life we all regularly use pronouns in place of names, so just what you already do for trans people too.

I can see why you resonated with the privileged girl with big tits that needed her mom to come rescue her from college because someone was different from her.

I saw an interesting interview clip of him on Vassy who you like. He mentioned how in 2018 they bought a pipeline for alberta and hoped it would ease tensions, only to immediately lose all seats in Alberta as a reward. Now Alberta has record oil production under the Liberals. And Carney is bending over backwards even more to give Alberta everything it wants including it seems quite likely yet another pipeline, and I suspect he will get about exactly the same amount of eased tensions.

She actually has small tits and found her and her mother annoying characters but she nailed it pronouns.
They are pretty much a fad anyways nowadays

You forgot they are the reason the private sector walked away from the pipeline .they also passed many bills making sure no other ones are built

Remember when uke was beaming with joy when Guilbeault was named environment minister. Claimed he had what it took to save the planet because he was a whack job who's been arrested for protesting before.

How's the Elbows up! crowd feeling today? Still putting up the good fight, has our global banker saved the country? How about that new world order, any day now I'm sure just have to have patience.

I remember he said if they ever remove the carbon tax Im done yet he never quit the party. Even know he will not be resigning till after the summer break. Needs that free 3 months of pay

I get your point.

I have had interactions with two transitioning trans people, and both were using she. One was in a professional setting and the other was/is in a social setting. It was not difficult except for the initial part where visually my cues are "he," but "she" was the correct word. As you noted, the adjustment happens quickly after a couple misfires, and the person in question isn't present which helps.

On to the they/them, I have not encountered a person where this has arisen. I am retired now, but if I was back in the workplace with a large number of people in my network I am sure there would be a % of people electing to be referred to as they/them. I'd respectfully adjust. "They" can work in many cases but as you noted, there are many conversational situations that are begging for a "he" or "she." I am sure those would be the hardest to adapt to.

My only real issue (and I think others have the same issue) is why chose words that have established meanings? That said, I would imagine that if new words to replace they and them became the norm, then those words would be often used as hateful slurs - something which can't really be done right now because of the multiple meanings of they/them. So, maybe it is good we have they/them, despite the potential confusion.

PS. I think you meant I have a "limited" imagination, and in this case I wouldn't disagree...lol

The singular they is super common even having nothing to do with trans people (ie "When you go to the doctor don't forget to ask them to check out your wart"). So I don't think of this as changing the meaning of a word that has a different established meaning. It is using an established word in an already established way. I think it's actually much more natural than some of the new pronouns like xe/xir or whatever - although to be honest despite teaching hundreds of students a semester with many they/them's in them I actually don't know if I've ever seen a student use one of those so actually that would be much more unfamiliar to me. They/them is just common at this point.

I don't mean to be an ******* on this point. My dad's retired and calls it "East Indian" every single we go out for Indian, he intellectually knows that this isn't the correct way to say things in 2026 but it is just ingrained and hard to change. So I have some grace that it can feel a bit awkward at first for people who haven't experienced it - I'm around young people all the time so I experience it. But I guess my point is that it really isn't hard to get over that:/

I think he ultimately did a pretty decent job. The industrial carbon tax that remains and the consumer carbon tax that don't remain were both excellent policies. He worked for a government that still bought and built a pipeline that led to record oil production, so it wasn't anywhere close to a far left environmental utopia, absolutely a compromised position. I think the world had a moment there where Biden was finally doing big things on reducing carbon in the american economy and europe doing a lot of things etc that there could be some momentum towards countries collectively doing more to solve this problem and Guilbeault's policies make sense in that context.

I wished that happened.

But unfortunately your guy got elected. Ripped up every single bit of American leadership on this issue and shattering most of that momentum. There is a huge difference between Canada being an outlier causing economic restriction doing it alone against the US not doing anything, and Canada acting in tandem. I don't expect you to understand a word of this post, of course, but there you have it.

Well the country is feeling this way in the latest poll:

It has become obvious that Trump will not remove the high tariffs on Canada, at least not any time soon. I guess if you want to try and blame Carney for Trump's action that is on you. But he appears to be doing a lot of decent things being met with high approval and I'm just hopeful we get somehow get through the CUSMA process despite Trump's obvious sustained attempt to extract as much from Canada as possible even when it hurts American interests.

Lol. Are we going to get a post critiquing an entire country every time there is a criminal from there?

How do you feel about immigration from Muslim countries out of curiosity? So much of your posting reminds me of ages of arguments about keeping Muslims out of the country because of terrorism and whatever and how incompatible their culture was with "ours" etc. And the same kind of retorts that well ok the overwhelming majority of Muslim immigrants are not going to be these terrorists etc. Or south americans and drugs or italians and the mafia etc etc. Basically your posting here is both unique (I've never seen someone so focused on the bad bad Indians) while also being like super common and repetitive of so many other types before it.

It's never you critiquing what's happening it's always you showing how much of a leftist ****** you truly are.

Not trying to indite an entire country as "unequal" and not able to "mesh" with Canada because of some new stories of criminals really really really isn't a "leftist" position buddy.

Bad news guys. We are in a recession. The smallest technical recession possible, -0.1%, but Poilievre is at least excited:

Not a single mention of Trump in his list of explanations. Let's check in on BMO chief economist.

Oh so it's mostly the trade war. And some cutting of government spending which Poilievre wants to do more of. Weird.

That's not what makes you a leftist, weird this needs to be spelled out for you.

You sad, sad little man.

Why do I care about approval rating approvals? What a stupid response. How about a government that does what's best the country not for approval ratings, crazy concept I know. Recession, record food bank visits, investment leaving the country, skilled workforce leaving the country, etc.

Has it become obvious he won't remove tariffs because Carney is a poor negotiator or he doesn't want to? Remember Elbows up! We will have a trade deal by June (of last year). What happened?

Oh weird, I thought Canada had a moral obligation to do something about it. Was Trudeau working in tandem with Trump during his first term when the carbon tax was implemented?

Lets be clear his approval ratings are so high as anyone could have done a better job than Justin. Folks are glad they are rid of the carbon tax that made their lives more expensive .

Shifty is not wrong Carney has made a bunch of promises one was to resolve tariffs not sure of the date but its long passed . Do I think he has done a good job yes but he is basically Stephen Harper 2.0 with the exact same climate policies

LMAO. You explicitly asked how the "Elbow's up!" crowd was feeling now, so I shared that yes his approval is absolutely through the roof - and across demographics not just the "Elbow's up!" crowd. I'm sorry I responded to your question with the answer to your question.

Trump happened. He has shown absolutely zero willingness to deal in any way. Is there some magical other way Carney could have magically gotten a deal - and in particular a deal that was actually favourable to Canada and not a capitulation? I don't know. It's so hard to evaluate.

If you think "not justin" and "not consumer carbon tax" are the two reasons people like Carney I think you are really missing out on why he is so popular. Of course since everyone on the federal backstop no longer gets carbon rebate checks they don't have any meaningful more money in their lives. Some might get confused by this due to Poilievre lies. But I doubt there are very many people in Canada giving Carney credit because they feel a whole lot richer now that they are not getting those rebate checks.

After a decade in power, did Harper implement an industrial carbon tax? No, they are not the "exact same climate policies" lmao.

That's right. Every country does. And Canada's - as one of the highest carbon emissions per capita in a rich country - as a proportionally higher moral obligation. And on the other side there is realpolitik. Being WAY out the front of the pack in terms of carbon policies is a much worse economic hit than if you are slightly leading. I want Canada as a middle power to slightly lead and work in conjunction with other powers, this is how you combat the tragedy of the commons. In 2016 Trump also stopped doing everything for the climate - regrettably. I think Canada did the right thing getting started on a carbon tax that was super low levels at the beginning and ramping up over time.

I know you always think you've got some gotcha, but as always you have come up empty handed.

You get that endlessly calling me a "Leftist" just doesn't, uh, work as an insult. Like I'm proudly on the left. When you accuse me of being a Leftist professor it's like....ok? Yes? And?

But you often seem to throw this in however not when espousing any particularly far left position, just mainstream technocratic ideas. I don't have any particularly radical ideas on immigration, just vanilla banal observations that it's fine to have international students work part time jobs to afford food when they are dropping 50k a year on tuition and the like.

Friendly reminder to the decimate immigration crowd: we should EXPECT frequent quarters of GDP decline as the population declines. Looking at some charts it is looking like GPD per capita is actually rising over the last year as the population declined but GDP itself is essentially flat.

lol apparently the decline was actually -0.036% on a quarterly basis. lmao at pablito claiming I'm sad for pointing out this is like the smallest technical recession ever.