I doubt it. The provincial governments already run massive "health insurance" programs in Canada, this would not have been an impossible task to add a small dental program that only covers a fraction of the population to that.
Private "health insurance" cannot be cheaper than public. You have expenses which are the cost of people going to the dentist. And you have revenues, which are paid for through taxes. The only math that changes is that private insurance also adds profit for shareholders on top.
This is purely about privatizing Canadian healthcare.
Montreal is a long way from having the kind of culture where they can have no garbage cans AND no litter. Let's just put some garbage cans in problem areas and reduce the trash problem.
Until then the dairy industry is going to keep using the regulation to its advantage whenever it can to keep others out of the market.
I don't know what's confusing.
1.A regulation was created to control what you can and can't put in the product called "milk" for the good of the customer.
2.The dairy industry used the regulation that was built to restrain them to keep vegan milks out of the market dishonestly using the "for the good of the customer" argument.
3.If someone can fix the regulation to allow both well regulated milk and non dairy milks then it'll put an end to this bullshit.
Where have I lost you? Just because 2 happened doesn't mean 1 didn't happen first. In fact 2 would have been a lot harder if there wasn't regulation controlling the word milk in the first place.
I know it feels easy to armchair regulate but it's not usually that easy. Like if you keep current milk regulations but then let people add a word before milk to escape the rules (to allow oat milk for example) then the dairy industry will pull shit like "pure milk" and "super milk" to escape the rules. It's a cat and mouse game as soon as you start adding exceptions.
Milk is one of the longest regulated foods because the dairy industry misbehaves so much. The industrialisation of milk was so bad it caused tuberculosis outbreaks among other things.
I'm not saying there isn't a good solution, there are always many good solutions possible. All I'm saying is not to forget that there is a reason the word milk was regulated for so long. Whatever exception is carved out for almond milk has to be well constructed enough not to weaken the current milk standards, yet broad enough to allow for any variety of plant based milk and that's going to take some serious expertise. Enshrining plant based milks in a well thought out regulation is going to be the best way to stop this whole "only animal milk is milk" stuff. Until then the dairy industry is going to keep using the regulation to its advantage whenever it can to keep others out of the market.
Being a regulator is like being a teacher. There is one kids who keeps putting crayons in his nose so you make a no crayons in your nose rule to stop him and it works great until this one kid uses crayons in nostrils to make amazing pictures for a talent show and suddenly the first kid says "hey I thought you said no nose crayons, why is she allowed crayons now"
The main problem is that it's actually super hard to have a regulatory definition of "milk" that forces the dairy industry to not put stuff in milk, but also allows up to 100% of the product to be oats.
Vegan steak will be difficult for the same reasons. But I would guess vegan sausage, burgers, nuggets, boneless wings etc... will be very easy to approve since some products are already more fillers than meat already lol!
Well it was originally designed to stop the dairy industry from putting weird stuff in milk, so there definitely a need because they kept trying to put weird stuff in it.
I'm just saying that Milk is a regulated term that's already been used to stop the milk industry from misbehaving so it's easy for the milk industry to use it to keep out competitors. Burgers, sausages, and other highly mixed foods aren't regulated the same way and I don't expect the meat industry to have any success on those fronts outside of rogue states like Florida.
They won't win burger or sausage or anything like that. You can already put what you want in those, breadcrumbs, vegetable protein, fruits and vegetables, various flavours and spices, and it's still a burger/sausage.
The milk I get. Milk was highly controlled in terms of what adultrants were allowed, so when they say "we can't even add extra aspartame, but they can make the whole thing out of oats?" They get a lot of traction. Now why they wanted to add aspartame I don't have a fucking clue.
A lot of the responses are correct, but there is one aspect being missed.
Liberals don't NEED to hate conservatives. There are real problems in the world that the left is trying to remedy.
Conservatives NEED to hate the left. Modern conservatism (and some would argue all conservatism) doesn't have any moral ideology. There is nothing they're fighting to for. Conservative ideology is the idea that there is a group that the law should protect but not bind and a group that the law should bind but not protect. To push this, an out-group has to be created and hate is the only way to dehumanize someone enough to treat them the way conservatives treat women, minorities, LGBTQ+ etc...
Conservatives hate Liberals because conservatism doesn't work without hate. They hate because they NEED to.
I like this because he uses words conservatives understand so he can reach a broader audience. Negative income tax is a MUCH BETTER name than UBI for the same thing.
I don't agree with everything he says but his messaging is almost revolutionary.
I definitely think this is a great answer, with the only caveat being that working in a space that doesn't have windows all day is pretty lame. I'd like to see what that would look like.
I believe the hurdle for that might be regulatory. For good reason in my opinion because mixing residential and commercial/retail on the same indoor floor has a lot of unique considerations that I'm not sure have been looked at. Letting real estate hedge funds decide based on profit only will be a nightmare lol
Office buildings have too much "inside space". Regulations, and human life, requires windows for residential living areas, so this inside space is "wasted" in office to apartment refits. There are tons of great ideas on what to do with this space in terms of community space, but very few profitable ones. Once commercial rents crashe and these buildings lose most of their values you'll be surprised what becomes profitable again lol.
Well it's not nonsense. If Ukraine does something that helps Trump get elected everyone's fucked. He'll immediate stop supplying Ukraine and start sucking Putin off.
The US isn't saying we'll punish you if you keep doing this, they're just warning them that this can have undesired effects.
Personally, I think we should all accept some pain and just do a full trade embargo on Russia and Israel until they put their military back in their countries where they belong.
You start off strong then move straight to supporting the fucking Taliban, as if that's a reasonable position to take.
I agree, the article is likely highly sensationalized, but let's be clear the Taliban are a piece of shit government with extremely regressive and repressive views. Maybe this shit doesn't happen in Kabul, but Kabul seems bad enough that women can only show their faces and most are even too afraid to do that. That shows you that it's a TERRIBLE place to start with even in the best places. Unfortunately many people don't live in Kabul and it seems that the government isn't going to do anything to stop regional authorities from abusing their power and any young woman they can get their hands on.
Don't travel to Afghanistan. Every dollar that goes to Afghanistan supports religious oppression.