this term "forever war" is particularly stupid and facile and has this incredible level of ignorance baked into it.

ending the "forever war" suggests that perpetual war is something that is novel or unusual and that a state of normalcy is a state of peace. well, go hang out with some monkeys and tell me if you think that's still true.

war is like diamonds - it is forever. war is normal; it is a regular state of existence. peace is a hallmark disney cartoon fantasy phony reality that has never existed in history. even in the presence of dominant empires that succeed in slaughtering their closest competitors for a while, which are the periods of history that most closely resemble peace, war always exists on the edges. eliminating the "forever war" would require something like evolving into a different species, or perhaps global communism as a basic pre-requisite. yes, there will forever be war. you silly kids will have to grow up a little and deal with that.

oddly, this term is being associated with a left. what? it is the most basic, blatant expression of the burkean conservative perspective of hierarchical harmony, where everything is in it's right place, that i could imagine hearing articulated. you couldn't better encapsulate conservative philosophy than with the phrase "end the forever war", and liberals and socialists are supposed to make fun of the conservatives for believing in such silly fantasies, rather than interpreting reality through experiment and evidence. marx, particularly, wrote a theory about conflict. socialism is about perpetual war. that's what it is.

so, this is not a left, it's a right.

so, yes, we will have war forever, and we will have war forever until we have communism. you'll never end war without getting rid of capitalism, at the least. these kids aren't even trying to write a theory, here.

i don't think randomly sending everybody $200 as a "rebate" is a very responsible use of public funds. it brings to mind goofy economic ideas like social credit.

we're talking about roughly 3.5 billion dollars, which could be spent on hiring nurses or building subsidized housing. we're overseeing a historic failure in this government to deliver basic services, and the premier is talking about mailing out checks in order to starve the beast.

at the least, if you're going to mail out checks, apply some kind of progressive gradation on it so that the money goes to the people that need it. don't just send everybody $200; targeted government subsidies don't increase inflation, generally speaking, but just handing out $200 checks to everybody is an exceedingly inflationary measure.

fwiw, i would also oppose cutting taxes for middle class families. the government should be spending this money on services, not giving it back to taxpayers.

ultimately, if the government can't figure out how to spend an extra $3.5 billion dollars in the middle of an overpopulation crisis, we quite clearly need to get a new government. there's no deficit of obvious things to do with this cash. we need an infrastructure bill in ontario and we need a government that will write it.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-government-rebate-cheques-election-1.7354672

biden's statement on what we call "residential schools" in canada suggests that the democrats realize they're likely going to lose new mexico, which is more evidence that the bottom is about to fall out.

bibi,

i know you're being precise and hitting military targets in iran and i love that you're doing that.

but can you blow up that fucking crane they use to hang people with for me?

thanks,

jessica