i want to make a suggestion to mr carney.

speak of what you know.

do not speak of what you don't. 

you have the resources to defer.

i also just want to briefly comment on this gay hockey player tv show.

i don't watch tv. i have no idea what this is.

but i suspect it's just confirming what every american already knew, which is that all canadians are gay. right?

is there an american hockey player on the show yet? i bet he knows the ten commandments.

i want to walk back something i said about the gst rebate the other day because i appear to have been mislead.

the initial reports said the gst rebate would increase by 25% for the next four years.

what that usually means is 25% per year for the next for years. for me, that would be:

(540*1.25^4 - 540) = (1318.36 - 540) = 778.36

778.36/4 = 194.59, and that's almost back to where the carbon tax rebates were, at around $200/quarter.

i therefore suggested the gst rebates were replacing the abolished carbon tax rebates, which were abruptly taken away without compensation, which was extremely harmful to almost all low income canadians.

however, that appears to not be what the government intended. rather, they appear to be using confusing language, and apparently meant that they are going to increase the amount once by 25%, and take it away after four years. that would amount to an extra (540*1.25-540) = $135/year over the next four years. quarterly, that would be $33.75 per check for the next four years, and then that will apparently disappear, as well.

i understand that it's an hst rebate, so it's intended to return the amount of taxes i paid on groceries. for myself, because i actually buy food when i'm at the grocery store, i pay essentially no taxes on groceries. food is not taxed in canada. the only item in my normal diet with hst added to it is doritos. the items that i would buy at a grocery store that are taxed are thing like toothpaste and shampoo, and when you add it up entirely, i probably make money quarter over quarter on the gst rebate.

but this does not come close to replacing the carbon tax rebate checks, or the increasing amounts that ow income canadians were set to receive from it in upcoming years, and the government disappointingly still has no plan put forward to replace those quarterly subsidies.

i qualified for the dtc, and i have been able to replace that lost subsidy with the cdb, and then some. i also qualified for the cohb. overall, i'm better off than i was last year, as i found ways to compensate.

many canadians did not and i am still looking to this government to explain how it intends to compensate low income canadians for the ghosted carbon tax rebate checks.

the reality is that anybody anywhere in the anglosphere who has studied the issue formally in any abstraction would know that it was settled british law to let the french settlers keep their culture and any dickhead or asshole british administrators trying to force english culture on the french would have actually probably gone to jail. it's not exactly common knowledge, but it's not exactly esoteric wisdom, either.

the reality is that while carney likes to cite rudimentary sources like thucydides (i read that in first year classics, too. greek civ 101.) in a pretentious way that is intended to make him look smarter than the average bear and smarter than he actually is, any actually educated person would realize that the two speeches, at davos and in quebec, actually both demonstrate deep levels of ignorance regarding the issues he's actually dealing with today, which are not homo economicus.

the reality is that if you were listening to carney speak carefully, and you actually understood what he said, you know he mostly made a fool of himself. the reality is he's been continually doing that for well over a year. he sounds smart, if you aren't, but what he actually is is overwhelmingly pretentious. he's actually continually thoroughly demonstrating that he's in way over his head and has no idea what he's doing or what he's talking about.

there's been a lot of attempt to study the way that economists think because it seems to be drastically different than the way almost everybody else thinks. the homo economicus syndrome is a manifestation of sociopathy in the form of a personality disorder. mark carney would seem to be a prime example in demonstrating the sociopathic symptoms of homo economicus syndrome, which uniquely presents in economists.

i have in the past suggested watching the corporation to understand mark carney.

i did not previously know the role that francis bacon played in developing the common law of conquest, as it was used in canada, and elsewhere in the british empire. i was taught the common law of conquest in a 3rd year university course on indigenous law in the process of getting my third degree at carleton, in sociology of law. they put down the law in a textbook format, attributed it to blackstone, stated it, said it was based on roman law, and didn't get much more into it than that.

so i just learned something, myself.

i slept briefly this morning, for about an hour, with a pair of jeans on. i was exhausted from sitting up for a long time to eat and just wanted to stretch out and i nodded off. i got up to defecate and was awake. i'm fairly sure i did not have any holes or rips in these jeans when i went to sleep and do recall looking at one of my knees some time last night, because i had to bend down to pick something up. i noticed when i got up that i had what looks like bite marks and scratch holes in both of my knees.

i was not bitten through my jeans.

i tend to sleep in the fetal position and that is bad for pants. but these jeans weren't just ripped from wear. there are puncture holes on both of the knees.

there is still absolutely no trace of them in here. but i'm a little worried.

i don't have any food for them to eat in the basement and thought i had chased them out of here for that reason. i imagine they have very poor bowel control and that if i can't find anything it's because they aren't here.

there is a summary of the britsh common law of conquest, here:

https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/AJLH/2004/8.pdf

i also want to point something out about what carney said the other day in quebec, given that quebec nationalists did not like it very much.

it's certainly true that carney's speech was remarkably naive. carney framed the relationship between canada's french and english as being some kind of historic anomaly of tolerance and enlightenment. the quebec nationalists jumped at that to point out centuries of assimilationist policy.

in fact, it's worth pointing out that the english did not do anything novel in quebec at all, but rather followed very clear existing british imperial precedent. the actual law in place in the british empire at the time, which the british empire applied all over the world, was that when you conquer a people in tact, you have to allow them to keep their own laws, language and religion. that wasn't something uniquely canadian, the british applied that rule everywhere, to everyone, and the british precedent actually came from roman law, as brought into the british system via common law. the romans allowed conquered people to keep their culture, so long as they paid their taxes. the issue was placed before the english judiciary, who studied it, and adopted the roman position.

there is nowhere in the broad british empire where the british conquered a people and enforced their language or laws on them. in india, for example, the local legislature only governed british settlers. the local indians were allowed to keep their laws. but, eventually, they opted to reform their system to adopt a legislature.

now, it's true that some random brits have run their mouth off over the years.

but quebec still has civil law, still speaks french and still has more catholics than protestants, even as it has moved towards a policy of secularism after the quiet revolution. canada has broadly followed the british imperial law, rooted in roman law, and allowed quebeckers to maintain their culture.

the truth is that donald trump, who has publicly repeatedly claimed he doesn't believe in climate change at all and suggested it's a chinese plot, is now essentially imagining effects of climate change in the near future that will require centuries to arrive at. donald trump didn't listen to the scientists when he was denying climate change, and his perception of how the arctic is going to open up is now rooted in fantasy, not science.

the science suggests that it may be the case that the north pole might be ice free for a week or two in the summer by 2060. the polar regions would continue to freeze in the winter. i am not aware of any predictions of the northwest passage actually opening up year round at all. there are some suggestions that it might be open for four months some years some time in the 2100s. it's about a 2 month journey through the passage, so even a four month time window is barely usable, unless you want to winter on the other side. projections for a truly usable northwest passage are so far in the future, and would require so much unchecked global warming, that they're barely worth contemplating.

the reality is that the shipping lanes are not opening up and that, even in the worst case scenarios, it's going to be at least 100 years before this is even worth seriously talking about. 

what does that actually mean, though?

it means a shipping lane full of dangerous ice bergs and unpredictable weather events. if the passage is three weeks slow in opening, or freezes over six weeks early one year due to weather, you could lose billions of dollars. nobody is going to rely on that any time in the near future.

there are real ramifications of climate change on shipping that the science supports, like an ice free, year round great lakes shipping route. hudson bay may become accessible year round.

but the reality is that the giant arctic ice sheets are not going anywhere for many decades or centuries to come - not even in worst case scenarios, which climate activists still hope to prevent.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/increasingly-awkward-case-of-canadas-demilitarized-arctic

if the idiot savants running nato continue to argue that a peace agreement with russia must include nato "peacekeepers" in ukraine, which is the outcome that russia invaded to prevent, then the russians will have no alternative but to continue to grind the ukrainians down until they get to the dnieper, even if it takes 20 years.

my packaging doesn't have a size, but i'm underestimating. these pitas appear to be 7" across, each.

the area of two 7" inch pizzas is calculated as:

2(π*(3.5)^2) = 24.5π.

the square root of 24.5 is a little less than 5. so, two of these things is equivalent to a 10" pizza made by a dishonest cook trying to rip you off a half inch, which is probably all of them.

i would split the recipe up, but the point is to make as much as i can get out of a can of tomato paste, and that's two medium pizzas, apparently.

my pizza is a little different this time, but it's a constant that, while the recipe makes 4, i can only eat two at a time. i haven't measured these but they're perhaps 4-5" pizzas. it's two small pizzas, but two very small pizzas. but also two very loaded very small pizzas.

- put the bacon on first

- chop one large green pepper into four parts and cut each one into small bits, and put them in small bowls

- chop up roughly a third of a fresh pineapple into chunks

- grate an entire block of mozarella cheese

- put four greek pitas on baking trays. i have two on a cookie tray, one on a pizza tray and one in a square casserole dish

- you may want to put olive oil on the pitas first

- on each pita, sprinkle: (1) dried dill, (2) basil, (3) oregano, (4) thyme

- also put hot sauce on it

- when the bacon is done, transfer it to a plate to let it cool, slightly

- note that i cook my bacon in olive oil margarine. so the remaining grease has bacon grease, olive oil and canola oil. rub that on your pitas with a small spoon to create a kind of pesto.

- rub the tomato sauce on over that

- then put the green peppers, pineapple, bacon, olives and whatever else

- put the cheese on

- bake

- cut four avacodo halves up into small chunks and put them into four small containers

- put a small amount of diced garlic in each container

- when it comes out of the oven, put the avocado/garlic topping on

- but a tablespoon of nutritional yeast (with b12) on it

- use more hot sauce

- slice it into four

- if you can lift this with your hands, congratulations.

- the pita will crisp up, but it should be pretty loaded

- you are probably better off using a fork

it's still not clear what this is, but the large amount of indigenous american items (avocados, green peppers, avocados) suggest it may be some kind of loaded quesadilla, as much as anything else. it's a franco-greek-mexican-italian pizza-like thing.

this is horrific and unconstitutional and i certainly hope somebody has a lawsuit on the way to get rid of this nonsense.

https://immigrationnewscanada.ca/new-canada-ifhp-co-payments-2026/