Jacob Stewart

When I was agnostic, I felt the same way. Christian culture is a pillar of Western Civilization, and the more we chip away with it, the more I see a decline in everything that we love and value. I think if we continue to not just stray, but intentionally distance ourselves from all things religious, the faster the decline will happen.

@JacobStewart__ @Tablesalt13 As an atheist, I 100% agree. Christianity is baked into the fabric of our culture. Blanket religious bans should not apply to christian stuff.

JUST IN - A Montreal school board has just fired 150 teachers for failing to remove their religious symbols most of the 150 teachers were fired for wearing hijabs.

My prediction is that a universal basic income will come first, which I think a lot of optimists expect as well, since it has to have some sort of progression before universal high income. It likely wouldn't be much, just something that someone could get by on. They might even have to live with roommates if that is their only income. The good thing about universal is that this would also be given to everyone, not just those unemployed. Someone with a job that's harder to automate could go from middle class income to upper class income. My only hope is that universal income doesn't come until we are literally out of jobs for people. Even if 1,000,000 people lose non-physical jobs to AI, I don't see that as a reason to implement any sort of UBI if there are jobs that still need to be filled. I would rather see training programs for trades, manufacturing, and other physical jobs. Until the eventual day comes were mass replacement occurs by robots and their simply isn't anywhere for them to work. I think we will see mass production of capable robots within the next 5 years, but I wouldn't expect UBI until years later, and then UHI when working is essentially optional. Giving high income before that would create a labor shortage even if there were only a million jobs left.

@elonmusk @NotesForTheFree How long until your robots can do my job?

Universal HIGH INCOME via checks issued by the Federal government is the best way to deal with unemployment caused by AI. AI/robotics will produce goods & services far in excess of the increase in the money supply, so there will not be inflation.

So lets say that's right then. if someone believe in God, reads the bible, praises god, lives by Christian values, teaches those to their children. We can just assume they aren't actually religious because they don't go to church right? I've got a friend, not religious at all, but in recent years he has started supporting more religion in Canada. He wants to support the Church, he wants to support Christian values growing in Canada rather than see it in decline. His reasoning for this is the same as my reasoning was a decade ago. Even without being religious, I knew that Christian values were crucial to Canadian culture and I wanted to do my part to preserve them. I've since found my faith in that time. and for the first few years, I only attended church a few times. So if someone tells me they are Christian, love Jesus, even if they only have a few favorite bible versus and haven't read all the scriptures, i'll believe them and I will pray that their faith only strengthens according to God's will. But I bet that the 60%+ Canadians, excluding non citizens, would not support banning teachers from wearing a cross. This is more likely a result of education being primarily run by people who consider themselves liberal, who are less likely to be religious than Conservatives.

@JacobStewart__ @Tablesalt13 Exactly, the census is about religious identity, and it's at 40-50%. What I meant was practice. I'm Montreal based and my friends are Christians but don't go to church. That practice has dropped to 2-3%. It may have increased with Filipinos and other groups.

Sure, which is why I wouldn't support a requirement to wear a cross or teach religion. At the same time, I don't actually support all the government control over our schools. The more regulations, the most administration positions they put in, it's all a bunch of money spent for often negative results.

@JacobStewart__ @Tablesalt13 There is a reason why Canada including Quebec chose to be secular country. It's never good idea to mix religion with any part of state.

Sure, and some provinces didn't join Canada until the mid 20th century, I don't look at those people, or their grandparents, as any less Canadian. Eastern Canada, even if it wasn't known as Canada, has had settlements for over 400 years. Some of my family arrived in the late 17th century. Even if people were seen as British or French, they worked the land, had families, and formed this country before it was even recognized as Canada.

@JacobStewart__ @vermabharat @Tablesalt13 Hundreds of years? Canada is 159 years old.

You are very right. Except for the fact that the 2021 census shows a bit higher than 2-4%. They are actually 53.8%. So unless there is evidence of over 90% of the catholics in quebec losing their faith in the past 5 years, which wouldn't be evident until the 2026 census gets published, I will go by those numbers. Though I will agree that it has likely fallen again. With some surveys suggesting in the mid 40% for regions like quebec, and overall Canada hovering a bit higher. It's also worth noting that the estimated number of immigrants in Canada from the 2021 census was 8.36 million, representing 23% of canada, most of which were not Christian. Some large numbers, such as Filipinos, would have brought in Catholics, but immigrants from China and India, were mostly non-Christian. I'd estimate the percentage of Christians in Canada out of just the citizens is likely closer to 60%, as if I take the Christian percentage from 2021, remove the immigrants, I get about 65%, but I would still have to factor out the likely religious groups, especially Filipinos. And I would include Quebec, as the Quebec government has already expressed concerns over the amount of immigrants that they had to accept. Which further makes me believe that Quebec should exclude the cross in this religious symbol ban.

@JacobStewart__ @Tablesalt13 The stats you're talking about is affiliation from census. Actual practice of Catholism fell from 90% to 2-4% now in Quebec. In Canada, it's down to ~20%. Quebec had a Quiet Revolution and went against the Church in the 1960s. That's why its culture accepts secularism better.

It's actually a decent example of capitalism. For starters, it shows that the consumer likes fried chicken sandwiches. The market responded to that demand. Secondly, a lot of people have opinions on which one is best, which ones are just bad, and things of that nature. If all of them used the same recipe, a large portion of the market might be lost to people who don't appreciate that recipe. Through capitalism, we have variety in our choice, even for very similar products. If this was communism, every fast food restaurant (if any) might have the same menu with the same recipes. If you don't like the chicken sandwich, then you won't have other options of chicken sandwich that you might like.

Capitalism is when Popeye's spicy chicken sandwich.

Funny how for hundreds of years, non-religious Canadians were fine. They didn't need to go to Church, or pray, or do anything religious. But the moment we get to 50% Christian, we start banning teachers from even wearing the cross in schools. This will probably even spread to most of Canada in the coming years. Canada is going down a steep dark hill, this is just one more step along the way.

@JacobStewart__ @Tablesalt13 Everyone plays by the same rule. Canada is a secular democratic country.

@Stashiv82 @Mattpetti32 Yup, you definitely are the rational, level-headed thinker here.

@JacobStewart__ @Mattpetti32 This entire bullshit post, is about what you and anecdotally others around you would do after calling the OP ridiculous.... This is the very definition of holier than thou, high horse bullshit. Fuck you, fuck your double think low iq bullshit.

$5.11 Just who the fuck is "everything" getting more affordable for?

The action of complaining about the cost of a non-essential good is ridiculous if you are going to purchase it. I didn't call him an ass, I didn't claim he was ragebaiting posts, I didn't accuse him of searching for this product just to make a post or anything like that. but to purchase a non-essential good voluntarily and then complain is ridiculous. I would have simply agreed on the absurd price if he took a picture of it in the fridge display at whatever shop he got it from. Also what did I say about you before you called me desperate. Is it because I said "As you've already pointed out"? Because the first 3 points was me agreeing with you and backing up the reasons why I agree with you, but ultimately not finding it relevant and explaining why. Or do you find anyone who disagrees with you to be a personal attack against you? You could have found any number of examples of the rising cost of essential, healthy food, and their cost comparisons from recent years and I would have completely agreed that inflation is becoming a huge burden on the average Canadian even if they avoid non-essentials. But you went with bottled water from remote-nunavut during pandemic times, for no logical reason, just that it's a big price tag on water.

@JacobStewart__ @Mattpetti32 No, you started it in your very first reply to the OP with this high horse bullshit... You then started with the passive aggressive bullshit with me the moment I said that particular *comment* was bullshit. I did not say anything about you until you said something about me.

Every single one of my replies has been relevant. You started the "are you desperate" "ALL this" and "Asshole" I don't resort to name calling. But I will make all my replies relevant to comments. You are just upset because when you asked for the rundown, I simply agreed with you about transportation and logtistics, and then pointed out that it was basically irrelevant. The most likely scenario is that the person is not in a northern community and they bought this drink on it's own. Comparing it to outliers does nothing but basically suggest that no example will matter as long as you can compare it to something similar somewhere in the world. You were also rude to the other person because they correctly pointed out that single use waterbottles was wasteful too. Which they aren't wrong. Boiling water is a very common method in northern communities and likely many opt for it over $83 packs of water. I don't even waste money on single use bottles at cheaper southern Canada prices.

@JacobStewart__ @Mattpetti32 You literally fucking started the replies with ad hominem, then me... I only responded in kind.

@Stashiv82 @Mattpetti32 Ad-hominem attacks are always the way to prove you are right. Remember that, just insult people, ignore what they say. It will get more people on your side.

@JacobStewart__ @Mattpetti32 Jesus fucking christ buddy.... get the fuck over yourself you absolute asshole lol

@Stashiv82 @Mattpetti32 ALL of this, takes a couple minutes to write. Not sure why everyone that wants to debates me always comments on the size of a reply. How long does it take you to think and write a few paragraphs?

@JacobStewart__ @Mattpetti32 I mean seriously... You came in and wrote ALL of this shit just to put someone else down for indulging in a treat and complaining that it's become significantly more expensive to indulge in a treat because of your own personal opinion. And you're still playing holier than thou..

Are you so desperate to prove someone wrong that you take up an example 6 years old from a northern community of less than 10,000 people, during a time that the supply chain was already stressed due to government lockdowns, easy CERB handouts, and people thinking the sniffles was covid? You're part of the "Well Technically" crowd of people that everyone hates because you pull examples that aren't actually relevant to the conversation and act like they prove whatever point you are trying to make. The post was of a single bottle, from someone in Nova Scotia, almost certainly purchased with a meal or as an impulse buy at a convience store. Yet you are bringing up wild edge cases, hyposisizing of the difference between packs and singles, trying to factor in unknown transportation costs. as if they might be in some remote region. And even in those extreme examples. It's still a pepsi, it's still non-essential. If someone is struggling to afford something in a remote area, they also should pass up non-essential goods that are costly enough for them to complain about it. You just want people to bow down to your wisdom because you determined that maybe there is some super rare chance that they got this from some northern locations, despite the obviously more likely scenario of it being a 20-30% increase on what people are already used to seeing bottled pepsi priced at in fast food.

@JacobStewart__ @Mattpetti32 Are you really so desperate you have to straw man a "prices are different everywhere" point? lmfao.

Totally agree with you and i apologize for my blatant ignorance. $5.11 is most likely a very reasonable price with insignificant profit or potentially even a loss from such a generous store. I hope if you ever see prices like this, you remember how your intellect overwhelmed me as you make your purchase. We should always assume that a post is equally likely to made by a person in norther nunavut as anywhere else in Canada as the populations are basically the same.

@JacobStewart__ @Mattpetti32 And even outside of that.. I've also pointed to the massive difference in price between buying "X"-packs, and singles. Since we both agree these are all factors, and you have no idea where this was purchased... your original "holier than thou" reply... is bullshit.

As you've already pointed out in one of your replies, this is in Nunavut. It's also one of the most northern communities in Canada. Fuel isn't free. Paying a trucker to drive all the way up there and then back with likely an empty truck isn't free either. Everything is more expensive that far north becuase of transportation costs. Larger and heavier items like water probably bear even higher amounts of that cost. The first example of 591ml bottle of pepsi for $5.11 is easy to see it's supply and demand, not transportation and logistics. This is because we can easily compare it to other items, even a 2L bottle of the same product from a grocery store is about half the cost of that tiny bottle. The small bottle likely came from a convenience store or some fast food restaurant, making it even more of an unnecessary purchase and the entire point of my reply was to illustrate how ridiculous it is to see something like this, fully knowing how expensive it is to nearby alternatives, and still purchasing it.

@JacobStewart__ @Mattpetti32 What about this? Gimme the run down....

Are you aware that basically all relevant statistics on the matter show that ~80% to ~90% of the murders that happen on reservations are actually caused by other local indigenous people. While there have been a few white people who have targetted indigenous. The per capita numbers still show that indigenous people are far more likely to kill white people than white people are to kill them. But of course people believe that's completely racist to say and people would rather we just look at indigenous victims and blame white people despite them mostly being killed by other indigenous people.

@CashMon55832121 @JacobStewart__ @SamanthaTaghoy This is a Canadian issue. You don't know the history here.

“MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+” The Canadian government just dropped this absolute monstrosity (and no, it isn’t satire).

@rdgrongoodnet1 @yegwave I agree, I don't see any reason for the level of spending the government is doing. Whenever they fund a program, it's often so much more expensive than if a company did it privately and charged for whatever service is being provided. We are being bled dry for wasteful spending.

@JacobStewart__ @yegwave That's not an excuse for them to keep spending. It *should* be the wake-up call to spend less, but buying votes with the public's own money (including to government workers and NGOs) is addictive.

A video showing Carney and Poilievre going at it in the House of Commons today is going viral 😂