If anyone was wondering Danielle was essentially copying pasting a milder version of what Marjorie Taylor Greene said.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-donald-trump-shooting-b2580000.html

The Georgia Republican congresswoman baselessly alleged there’s a conspiracy afoot, insisting “Democrats wanted this to happen” and have “wanted Trump gone for years and they’re prepared to do anything to make that happen.”

After attacking Democrats for repeatedly calling Trump a threat to democracy, she soon blasted the party with more extreme rhetoric, calling the country’s polarized politics a “battle.”

“We are in a battle between GOOD and EVIL,” she wrote on X on Sunday.

“The Democrats are the party of pedophiles, murdering the innocent unborn, violence, and bloody, meaningless, endless wars.

In case anyone needs a recap:

Presidential candidate calling for people to second amendment their politics into reality for almost a decade. Someone took them up on that suggestion.

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith — who once told former Fox News personality Tucker Carlson she wished he would put a federal cabinet minister in his "crosshairs" — called on "progressive" politicians to temper their language Monday after former U.S. president Donald Trump survived an assassination attempt.

I don't think there's enough time for the Liberals to seperate themselves from Trudeau at this point. If that was the direction they were going they should have done it a year ago.

I think twelve years later it pretty agreeable that compensation alone is not what stopping Canadians from having decent MP's and in itself there's a lot of sitting MP's that's probably not even worth minimum wage.

Fun chart I made:

Source data

Median Income: Income of individuals by age group, sex and income source, Canada, provinces and selected census metropolitan areas

MP Compensation: Indemnities, Salaries and Allowances

109 second video from 2012. This is going to be a rather long summary for a short video,

• Video starts off by saying the one thing political pundits agree on is slashing the MP's pensions
• Pierre qualified for a full pension at 31 because he got elected straight out of school
• How he's done nothing but is a expert in everything
• We'd avoid people like this in real life but the House of Commons is crawling with them

• He wants better MP's
• Taking off to Ottawa for 6 to 7 years is bad for the career and family
• Are we going to attract better MP by making the job less desirable
• End with "say when it comes to MPs instead of all of us piling on and lowering the bar let's aim high for a change"

Out of the many repost of this story since Friday this is most wild claim I've seen. It's on r/Canada level of ignorance.

The authors of the study by the non-partisan Fraser Institute

I've also never seen something with that many citation on Wikipedia.

The Fraser Institute is a libertarian-conservative Canadian public policy think tank and registered charity.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]

Credit bureaus are testing the inclusion of rent payments in credit scores, saying it’s a positive move launched by Ottawa.

Translation: The 2 private companies that monopolize peoples credit ratings says they're very happy that the federal government pushed even more business and influence their way.

For anyone wondering. If you wish to make a complaint, contact your provincial or territorial consumer affairs office. The federal government doesn’t regulate credit bureaus.

The article heavily leans on Ontario and what doesn't work.

If anyone wondering how things are going for a province the adopted a payment system less focused on volume.

700 more family physicians in B.C. since payment revamp: doctors

It's amazing that a 7 billion dollar company goes to court to fight someone for $800. Aside from obviously being in the wrong.

...awarding $650.88 in damages for negligent misrepresentation.

$36.14 in pre-judgment interest and $125 in fees

B.C.’s Housing Minister, Ravi Kahlon, told Global News Monday that this couple’s landlord should “give himself a head shake” but he is in a legal position to do this.

“I mean, this is the challenge that we have with sometimes landlords and tenants. Most landlords are good people and they operate in a good, transparent way. But this is a situation in which reminds us that we need to continue to find ways to strengthen the rules to ensure that the tenants are protected when they move into new places,” Kahlon said.

I really don't understand why people keep perpetuating the belief that vast majority of landlord are anything but for profit investors and society should treat them as such.

This loophole has existed and been used unfairly for a long time now I really don't understand why they haven't amended the RTA to at least cap the extra occupancy increase and exempt a reasonable amount of children.

"Hodgins says he was offered a C$2,000 flight voucher by the airline, but said compensation would not “fix the problem” of how the airline failed its disabled passengers."

Given how much this seems to be happening I'd be for fining any airline that does this 100k. Half for the victims and half for disability advocacy groups.

Microsoft's pay guidelines for job offers:

Level 70:

Base pay: $231,700 to $361,500

On-hire stock awards: $310,000 default to $1.2 million with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $945,000

Level 69:

Base pay: $202,400 to $316,000

On-hire stock awards: $235,000 default to $1.1 million with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $750,000

Level 68:

Base pay: $186,200 to $291,000

On-hire stock awards: $177,000 default to $1 million with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $490,600

Level 67:

Base pay: $171,600 to $258,200

On-hire stock awards: $168,000 default to $700,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $336,000

Level 66:

Base pay: $157,300 to $236,300

On-hire stock awards: $75,000 default to $600,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $160,000

Level 65:

Base pay: $144,600 to $216,600

On-hire stock awards: $36,000 default to $300,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $90,000

Level 64:

Base pay: $125,000 to $187,700

On-hire stock awards: $24,000 default to $250,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $60,000

Level 63:

Base pay: $113,900 to $171,500

On-hire stock awards: $17,000 default to $200,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $44,000

Level 62:

Base pay: $103,700 to $156,400

On-hire stock awards: $11,000 default to $125,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $32,000

Level 61:

Base pay: $92,600 to $138,100

On-hire stock awards: $6,500 default to $75,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $24,000

Level 60:

Base pay: $83,500 to $125,000

On-hire stock awards: $4,500 default to $50,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $16,000

Level 59:

Base pay: $74,400 to $110,800

On-hire stock awards: $3,000 default to $30,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: $0 to $12,000

Level 58:

Base pay: $70,300 to $92,600

On-hire stock awards: $2,500 default to $20,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: "By career stage"

Level 57:

Base pay: $63,800 to $83,000

On-hire stock awards: $1,500 default to $10,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: "By career stage"

Level 56:

Base pay: $60,700 to $77,900

On-hire stock awards: $1,500 default to $10,000 with approval

Annual stock award range: "By career stage"

Level 55:

Base pay: $55,200 to $71,300

On-hire stock awards: N/A

Annual stock award range: "By career stage"

Level 54:

Base pay: $51,600 to $67,000

On-hire stock awards: N/A

Annual stock award range: "By career stage"

Level 53:

Base pay: $46,600 to $59,700

On-hire stock awards: N/A

Annual stock award range: "By career stage"

Level 52:

Base pay: $42,500 to $54,600

On-hire stock awards: N/A

Annual stock award range: "By career stage"