practically speaking, if this doesn't come with a border tax, then the minimal effect it will have on me is that it will increase the factors that already make imported food more competitively priced than domestic food, and consequently continue to incentivize distributors to buy food that creates more emissions, through the need for greater transportation. and, i will consequently just pocket the check, while i continue to be frustrated by an irrational system.

see, and this goes over what i was getting at about the wto.

i was also able to find a quote from catherine mckenna, indicating she's aware of the need to address the issue. but, we'll see if it comes out in the policy or not...

https://ecofiscal.ca/2016/06/16/q-a-on-border-carbon-adjustments/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/04/climate/outsourcing-carbon-emissions.html

https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/4/18/15331040/emissions-outsourcing-carbon-leakage

https://www.silicon.co.uk/workspace/carbon-taxes-will-drive-outsourcing-19851?inf_by=5bd75be9671db8d5168b511b

mr. trudeau,

nobody cares about deficits. and, nobody cares about free trade, either - especially not the people writing these free trade deals.

the combination of creating a domestic carbon tax without a border adjustment and opening up trade with countries around the pacific rim, including mexico, is going to make canadian manufacturers less competitive, and lead to outsourcing and job losses. while this may technically reduce emissions in canada, the process this will spur is not a carbon transition, but one of deindustrialization - similar to the emissions reductions we saw in 2008, at the height of the last economic crisis.

this needs a border tariff to work.

and, nobody is going to care, either. nobody is going to take this ideologically pure liberal position on border taxes - well, at least, not anybody that wasn't going to oppose you, anyways.

liberals in the modern era are supposed to be pragmatic rather than ideological. this is a good example of a scenario where that pragmatism is necessary.

otherwise, this is not just incoherent, but potentially damaging.

dtk.

i'm not sure that the details are clear yet, but this actually might end up being a very stupid thing to do.

i just assumed they'd tax imports at the border. otherwise, what's the point?

after all, most of what we buy is made in a different country already as it is; if you make it that much harder for local producers to compete, you're really just outsourcing the pollution - and the jobs - to china. or mexico.

https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/when-it-comes-to-taxing-carbon-canada-has-it-exactly-backward

wait: they are going to calculate a carbon tax at the border and apply it to imports, right?

otherwise, this is going to hurt local farmers, and actually incentivize the wrong behaviour, as consumers will pay on the gas used to drive the tomatoes down the street, but not on the cost to ship them from mexico. so. that will actually make imported fruit less expensive, which is backwards.

the idea is to stop shipping goods around all over the place when it's not necessary to. so, that import tariff is necessary, or this is pointless.

so, i was distracted by the court thing - and that's going to be a constant for a bit.

& i had to sort of reconnect with myself over facebook, to remember how i was doing this.

...but, 07/2016 is now completely reconstructed.

july was very busy, which is what i intended at the time. august & september were messy, but i did get back to work in october, and both november and december were quite productive. so, the rebuild for the next two months is going to shift back to the politics side, which actually might mean it could come through a little quicker. we'll see.

it's at the end of december that i'll do the final close on inri000 - yeah. inri000. - and i'll have to figure out how to do it. i will need to date it to the current date, whenever it is in 2018 (hopefully not 2019). but, i'll have to figure out what i want to include over the last two years. i suppose i should leave a skeleton on the personal drama, meaning i could theoretically get through it quickly. i have no alter-reality posts at all for inri001, so i'll have to decide whether i want to layer them in as i go or leave them for last.

remember: the politics blog is going to flip over in november, so the remaining component to layer in will be the vlog posts. what that means is that i could just put the vlogs aside. and, i wouldn't be losing anything with it, because i now have the time stamps. hrmmn. yeah. that's maybe a good plan...

i'm going to eat, and then get ready to head out to do some shopping. i'll be spending the rest of the morning cleaning, with the aim of getting into the shower before i get into a clean set of sheets. i will then have a pile of clean clothes to sort through when i wake up. some of it needs minor sewing attention, some of it maybe doesn't fit as well as i'd like, and might not again in the future. i made the error of doing a lot of my new wardrobe shopping before fat redistribution.

speaking of which, i'm long overdue for some "new" clothes, too. that's maybe something to do this winter, as well.

i'll be back at august within 48 hours, i hope. i want these prints destroyed asap, but it makes the most sense to wait for a response, as the superior court process could take years.

so.

if this cop had done what he was supposed to do, and get a warrant, because it's a hybrid offence, then i would have almost certainly not have been arrested, but rather asked to appear before a justice - where i would have been given a charge sheet, and probably an information, which would have been a summary offence, and not required fingerprinting.

it follows that, because i was arrested illegally, that is without a warrant, i should not have been fingerprinted, and have grounds to file under s.8. but, it does rely upon the s. 7 part.

and, i would expect that the destruction would be ordered immediately, should that be determined to be the case, as they should not have been taken in the first place.

otherwise, i'm going to have to file a request, and as mentioned, it could take months.

but, what this means is that i'm better off going to trial, if it can be come to quickly - otherwise i'll be waiting for months. if they drop the charges tomorrow, i won't get clearance until at least the summer; if i go to trial, and get an immediate destruction, i could perhaps get clearance in the spring.

i can hermit for a while, that's fine.

but, i'm going to make sure she pays for it, in the end.

and, no i don't want to hang out in the pot lounge. i went through that once before - the one time i went there, it was like going back to everything i tried to avoid in high school.

i don't want to play pool or watch movies or play video games, and i don't want to hang out with people that do.

the one and only reason i would want to leave the house is to go to a concert. and, if there are no concerts around, i won't leave the house.

that's fine; there's lots of books to read. and, i still have a lot of work to do, too.

well.

if i can prove she filed a false report, why wouldn't i?

and i think i can.

and, if i suffer consequences of that, why shouldn't she be liable for them?

listen: i intend to win every suit that i launch. i'm not wasting my time. it will be worthwhile.

it's just a question of being thorough, and ensuring that every transgression is properly met, and every consequence is properly restituted for.

but, that is the bottom line: without border access, i have nothing better to do than drag them through court looking for concessions anyways, so why not?

people need to learn to think twice before they misbehave.

i mean, if i have to spend the next two years in this boring shithole because of this, i'm going to make sure everybody has to suffer with me.

right now, i'm looking at two or three civil cases against the complainant, and a major civil suit against the cops.

there's just that one bar here, and they only get a show worth seeing every couple of months.

i don't want to just "hang out". i'd rather stay in and read.

...and, when it's done, this woman can expect a civil suit over damages related to the border denial.

i'm almost certain i can pull out some false statements in the report, with the intent to get her charged on it, which should be useful for the civil case.

the whole point of fighting it is to get the prints destroyed so i can renew the nexus card.

if i want immediate action on the prints, it looks like i'm going to have to file a s. 8 [search & seizure] on it, too. the ordering of what happened is important.

- i was arrested around 21:00
- i was fingerprinted around 9:00 the next morning
- i wasn't charged until 17:00 that night.
- i do not believe that the decision to proceed summarily occurred until the file was transferred to chatham.

that means that i was fingerprinted before i was charged - which i would assume must be a breach, if it can be shown that i was illegally arrested.

so, we're going with:

s. 2 - speech violation [annoying communication is not harassment]
s. 7  - illegally detained [as i was arrested without a warrant on a hybrid offence]
s. 8 - illegally fingerprinted  [because i was illegally detained]

if i cannot get the judge to order an immediate file destruction on a charter breach, i'm going to have to wait two years for the prints to be destroyed....which means i'm going to be sitting here in windsor very bored for a very long time.

that said, if i get a settlement, i won't be staying here - i'll probably buy property in waterloo.