tellah

I understand, it sounds like you are concerned for India's international reputation in light of these allegations, and rightfully so. It's unfair from the perspective of a common citizen that your country gets flamed like this without proof, and insulting that people just say "well it's Canada, they aren't lying".

It's just that I trust my government and institutions and I believe them. Biden and Trudeau both spoke to Modi before this was released. Journalists in Canada were going to release this if the government didn't. I truly believe that handling it this way was bad for Canada too, so I don't see an incentive for Canada to lie which I do see for the Indian govt. Don't forget that other countries have their own relationships with India and will make their own decisions about supporting the allegations, not necessarily in light of the quality of proof but rather for pragmatic reasons. I think this whole affair will be painful for normal people in both countries, so in that sense you're absolutely right that diplomacy failed.

Still I'm curious: what do you think would be the reaction if the allegations turn out to be true?

Fair enough, I see where you're coming from and fully expect some proof. I do however have doubts that any proof will ever be conclusive enough to convince people and certainly not enough to get Modi to admit the truth if his govt is truly behind it. So what will providing proof accomplish anyway? Not providing proof might be a tactic to elicit lies that can be demonstrated as such through a trickle release of proof, enough to prove that the deniers are liars.

At the end of the day, Canada is a sovereign country and they are free to level a number of consequences against a foreign government if they so desire, including sanctions, visa restrictions, and so on. The only proof they need is for themselves, and to take action that will protect Canadians from foreign assassinations in the future. Canada really does not have to prove anything to India, especially if they do not believe the Indian govt is acting in good faith.

But it's not exactly a threat is it? It's a very reasonable observation about how Ukrainian refugees might feel and behave.

Wouldn't you feel the same way? Your country gets invaded, you flee to a generous supporting friendly country. That country stops being supporting, and your chances to return home start to vanish. You didn't choose to be here. Now you're stuck in a foreign country that you feel could be doing more to fight injustice and give you a chance to return home.

He's the president of a democracy, not a mind controller. People will feel a certain way. He's simply observing this potential situation, as a warning to the allies not to slide into complacency.

Yes this is true. But what do you think is the reason? Like is it because there's heavy metals in the dye, so the plate is kinda toxic? Or maybe because it's just too fragile, chips easily, etc?

As the consumer I don't know what regulatory loopholes they are exploiting when they state "decorative use". I doubt the average consumer has the time to do this research. Because a plate is a plate and people will use it to put food on when it's sold in that way, the intended usage is obvious regardless of the tiny disclaimer.

This has been my understanding of the conflict. Ukraine has been steadily and openly moving toward greater integration with Europe / The West, and therefore away from Russia's control.

Trying to understand "Why is Russia doing this?" , the initial invasion, destruction of power infrastructure, dams, occupation of power plant, mining farmlamd, destroying schools and malls, every time the answer is simply: If we can't have it, no one can.

Laughing at "God's Pocket Provincial Park". Never heard of this place before, what a name. I'm sure it's beautiful - gotta respect that BC license plate telling it like it is.

Not an industry, not fraudulent. It's socialized health care. They must be responsible stewards of public funds to ensure that everyone has access to reasonable standard of care - this includes what care is covered and how much service providers are allowed to charge. Sadly things will fall through the cracks, like rare cancers for which highly specialized care is required. But if it covered everyone to go outside of the province for medical care the system would fall apart. Thankfully a solution was found for this person.

I mean it shouldn't be that hard to understand. Housing prices skyrocketed when interest rates dropped during the pandemic. Add the effects of inflation, increases municipal evaluations leading to higher taxes, and you get more costs passed on to renters. This started before all the news of "HuGe SuRgE ImMiGrAnTs".

That being said there is still plenty of truth to the argument that if we do indeed want to welcome more people here, we better make sure there are affordable places to live. So the article addresses that better regulations are needed to ensure an adequate supply of affordable housing. BUT, if people already in Canada are really struggling to get affordable housing, and the number of people who need affordable housing is increasing, you can see why this might be a problem.

A healthy city needs socioeconomic diversity. Not that long ago Montreal was known for cheap CoL allowing people of all walks of life to thrive. Putting aside the artists, students, and general eccentrics that contribute to the vibrant life of the city, we have to consider where the hell are our minimum wage workers going to live. I seriously don't understand how places like Vancouver do it. Does every coffee shop, fast food, retail etc worker commute 3hrs each way? What about the teachers, nurses, garbage collectors? Or do they all get paid way more and everything just costs a lot more?

There's a compromise possible and despite being a major city without lots of undeveloped land, there is still plenty of space reasonably close to the city where high density affordable housing could be. Doesn't have to be prime real estate right downtown. There just needs to be social will and courage to stand by the conviction that this is something good for the city. The truth is that like someone else said, the fine is too low and developers just see it as the cost of doing business.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet had both rejected Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s offer to see the documents, arguing it was an attempt to trap them into agreeing not to speak about allegations in public.

Am I right to feel like absolutely nothing of consequence will come of this? The two biggest critics of the ruling party won't know the true extent or evidence. The two sidekicks can see the whole story but will be gagged. So we ultimately won't know the truth and it'll all just devolve to posturing.

Surprised to hear someone so confidently asserting that more prohibition is necessary. None of what you suggested really aligns with harm reduction and I would argue that more restrictions on vaping and on alcohol would backfire in terms of black market availability and less regulatory oversight.

I'm unaware of the proof that vaping is as bad or worse than tobacco. My understanding is that the consensus is vaping, while harmful, is significantly less harmful than smoking tobacco. https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/vaping-substantially-less-harmful-than-smoking-largest-review-of-its-kind-finds

And for the record, typically how it works when you want to make a claim about proof and evidence is that you cite your sources. You can't simply use hyperbolic language, wave your hands and say the magic word "science" and expect people to just believe you.

I don't think it's fair to the other athletes who also worked super hard to make it to the Olympics. It's not a prestigious competition if it's full of cheaters.