my shoes also came in today, and they fit perfectly. that's a size 7 kids shoe.
so, i ended up with
1) size 7 kids pink puma classics with what is a questionable sole for girlishness use. the ad said rubber, but i think it's pvc. disappointing. i'm going to keep these because they're cute, but i may get an adult pair, too.
2) size 9 women's black suede rubber platforms, which are sort of dressier. i wanted these to be walking shoes due to the huge rubber soles, but they're kind of too nice to trudge around in and i think i'm going to put them aside.
3) size 8.5 women's mid-top black canvas vans, with rubber sole & pink laces. these are probably better for long walks, even if the soles aren't quite as thick. i would see these as more expendable.
4) size 7 men's waterproof hiking boots, brownish, ozark trail. these are for walking around in the slush. growing up in ottawa, i've usually had a pair of boots like this, but i initially decided i wouldn't need them in windsor. i'm hoping these last a while and can be pulled out when useful.
i already had
5) size 6 children's rain boots, bluish. these should last for years.
6) size 6 children's winter boots, black. i'm going to need to touch these up a little as there's some hairline cracks in the front, but these are what i'll use to go out in the actual snow, if or when i have to. if i can fix the cracks and just wear them when necessary, these could last years and years.
7) falling apart airwalk classics that were size 9 women's.
8) some falling apart walking shoes i bought at the dollar store.
outside of potentially buying a second pair of puma classics in search of more clearly rubber soles, the last thing i'm going to want is a pair of super cheap shoes for bicycling. i considered shoe gooing the airwalks, but the bottoms are just trash - which is frustrating because the shoes themselves are otherwise so much better built than any of the others around the heel and the toe. if i could find another pair of them, and just replace the sole altogether, though...
and, i think that should probably last me quite a long time, hopefully. i mean, that's the intent; this isn't frivolous. i'm trying to figure out my footwear needs for the next several years now, while i have a good opportunity, and then ensure i don't have to worry about it for a while. i now have rain boots, snow boots, slush boots, cute running shoes (with a skate rubber sole), dressy platform shoes and what seem like pretty comfortable utility shoes (also with a skate rubber sole). i can probably benefit from a second pair of decently built running shoes, and i need some kind of cheap throwaways for utility. but, that should do me. really. for a while..
i'm 5' 8", i don't feel i need heels or pumps. and, i don't exist in the business world, either. i've had these discussions with people at bars "i wish i wore more comfortable shoes". i wish you did, too. really. i have some girlier shoes, but i don't have a lot of opportunities to wear them, and don't see the use in spending money on them.
Tuesday, November 6, 2018
i didn't get started on this again until after midnight, so i only picked up a few things.
so, the coffee machine is about 0.18. i've never noticed it as a problem, previously.
the 150 W bulb is the 3:00 reading, suggesting it's about 0.15 if run alone. i think a 0.01-0.02 fluctuation is acceptable noise. this is far too much for one light, either way - and is consistent enough.
and, it would seem as though the fan is running at 0.1/hr or so. this is kind of an unavoidable cost, i was more interested in getting the fan alone so i can get a clean reading on the heat lamp.
i measured the fan with the heat lamp & the fan with the led this morning, which i'll be able to compare tomorrow afternoon.
so, the coffee machine is about 0.18. i've never noticed it as a problem, previously.
the 150 W bulb is the 3:00 reading, suggesting it's about 0.15 if run alone. i think a 0.01-0.02 fluctuation is acceptable noise. this is far too much for one light, either way - and is consistent enough.
and, it would seem as though the fan is running at 0.1/hr or so. this is kind of an unavoidable cost, i was more interested in getting the fan alone so i can get a clean reading on the heat lamp.
i measured the fan with the heat lamp & the fan with the led this morning, which i'll be able to compare tomorrow afternoon.
i've also uploaded three blog posts that i wrote in 2016 and i'm dating to 1996. these were written for the liner notes for inri000 & the music blog in general; while i won't be mirroring here, i will be reconstructing this page from 1996-2013 as a part of the alter-reality, and uploading various historical writings, as they come up. that should separate out over 1997, which was supposed to happen over 2017. i will need to track down my old usenet posts...
it was when i moved across town that i got internet access in my room, and i started posting to usenet.
these are the three posts, which are creative writing, but are politically relevant.
http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/1996/05/really-enjoying-new-soundgarden-record.html
http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/1996/06/the-quake-soundtrack-is-really-really.html
http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/1996/07/scenery-and-fish-and-building-rooms-in.html
it was when i moved across town that i got internet access in my room, and i started posting to usenet.
these are the three posts, which are creative writing, but are politically relevant.
http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/1996/05/really-enjoying-new-soundgarden-record.html
http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/1996/06/the-quake-soundtrack-is-really-really.html
http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/1996/07/scenery-and-fish-and-building-rooms-in.html
so, that gets me through season 9, which is most of the way through august, 2016. i need to have a big meal before i finish the rest of the month, and then get to real world stuff for tomorrow morning. i think the lights were seriously the last thing to build for the bathroom; the next step is to set up the dining/living room, which will also act as a side library. that should take me through the rest of the week, meaning i should be able to get started on season 10 by the weekend, hopefully.
i just need to keep working and get through it as quickly as i can.
i just need to keep working and get through it as quickly as i can.
listen: it's less that i'm not on either side of the election, although i suppose that is a technical truth. it's more that i take a kind of classical anarchist position: it is the democrats and republicans that are actually on the same side, which is the side of capitalism. the side i am on is the side that opposes both parties, and broadly equally so.
from about 1930-1990 or so, the democrats were usually the least evil option. the lines started to blur with clinton, and the spectrum may be shifting with trump.
but, realizing that the republicans may be becoming the lesser evil is not to take their side against the democrats, or switch sides, because i was never on the side of the democrats in the first place, and the republicans are still very evil.
races for the senate and the house and the governor and etc are going to more individualistic. as an anarchist, i would have never presented a party preference; the reality is that the vast majority of these races are inconsequential, and the candidates will end up with virtually indistinguishable voting records. in some cases, there may be democratic candidates worth supporting; in others, there may be republican candidates worth supporting. but, broadly speaking, i am more likely to support an independent or third party candidate than i am to support either of the two major parties, who i see as broadly interchangeable.
to an extent, i guess if the republicans think i'm secretly a democrat and the democrats think i'm secretly a republican then the conclusion is that i must be a fair voice - and not one in the centre (the centre of a one-party state is the one-party state, itself), but one outside of the spectrum. and, i often place myself outside of the discourse - because the side i'm on is the one that opposes the two of them equally, as a two-headed monster.
the facts on the ground are that the republicans are engaging in massive, widespread vote suppression tactics, and that the effects of these efforts have been decisive in multiple contests over the last several years, including the last presidential election. any polling analysis consequently needs to be very careful that it isn't overestimating support amongst groups that are going to have difficulty voting.
and, that is truly the extent of my analysis.
from about 1930-1990 or so, the democrats were usually the least evil option. the lines started to blur with clinton, and the spectrum may be shifting with trump.
but, realizing that the republicans may be becoming the lesser evil is not to take their side against the democrats, or switch sides, because i was never on the side of the democrats in the first place, and the republicans are still very evil.
races for the senate and the house and the governor and etc are going to more individualistic. as an anarchist, i would have never presented a party preference; the reality is that the vast majority of these races are inconsequential, and the candidates will end up with virtually indistinguishable voting records. in some cases, there may be democratic candidates worth supporting; in others, there may be republican candidates worth supporting. but, broadly speaking, i am more likely to support an independent or third party candidate than i am to support either of the two major parties, who i see as broadly interchangeable.
to an extent, i guess if the republicans think i'm secretly a democrat and the democrats think i'm secretly a republican then the conclusion is that i must be a fair voice - and not one in the centre (the centre of a one-party state is the one-party state, itself), but one outside of the spectrum. and, i often place myself outside of the discourse - because the side i'm on is the one that opposes the two of them equally, as a two-headed monster.
the facts on the ground are that the republicans are engaging in massive, widespread vote suppression tactics, and that the effects of these efforts have been decisive in multiple contests over the last several years, including the last presidential election. any polling analysis consequently needs to be very careful that it isn't overestimating support amongst groups that are going to have difficulty voting.
and, that is truly the extent of my analysis.
Monday, November 5, 2018
this has become commonplace, and he's projecting.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/5/18064610/trump-midterm-elections-voter-suppression
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/5/18064610/trump-midterm-elections-voter-suppression
i have not been following the midterms and do not have any suggestions. but, i again must point to the dominant factor in the previous cycle: if you are a poor person or a minority in a district held by the republicans at the state level, your ability to actually cast a ballot is, at this stage in history, actually quite precarious. it's gotten to the point where polling firms actually have to scale back their numbers to account for voter suppression tactics. and, what happened in 2016 is that they didn't scale it back far enough - even as i was arguing that they were manipulating data to absurd extremes. to properly account for the range of tactics that republicans are using to prevent people from voting nowadays, you need to perform surgery on the sample.
what that means is that the democrats are going to have to eat into the republican base if they want to actually win seats in these regions. it's not enough to work up minorities and poor people, because when they get to the polling places, they won't be allowed to vote. they have to make the ground up amongst demographic groups that are actually allowed to vote.
i don't know what the data says on this point because i haven't been following it. but, don't be surprised if you hear things like there was "low turnout amongst hispanics and african-americans".
what that means is that the democrats are going to have to eat into the republican base if they want to actually win seats in these regions. it's not enough to work up minorities and poor people, because when they get to the polling places, they won't be allowed to vote. they have to make the ground up amongst demographic groups that are actually allowed to vote.
i don't know what the data says on this point because i haven't been following it. but, don't be surprised if you hear things like there was "low turnout amongst hispanics and african-americans".
so, this is the first round of experiments.
as is clear, the base/background rate is constant around 0.14. some fluctuations are going to happen, but that's the background noise.
the spike at 20:00 is from having both of the type j bulbs running, which was 250 W, in total. these remain small numbers as isolated spikes, but an extra 0.24 is significantly higher than the base rate, which includes two led bulbs. and, running .24 for 5 hours a day adds up to 35 kwh/month - nearly a third of my target.
the spike at 11:00 is from running the 100 W bulb, which took up 0.11 of the 0.24, indicating that the 150 W bulb took up 0.13. see, that's counter-intuitive, and part of what i wanted to check. i'll verify that tomorrow afternoon.
the new bulbs should be running at roughly a tenth of the power, and if i can cut that 35 down to 4 then i'm most of the way towards renormalizing my usage.
i'll check the other switch tonight, after 19:00.
as is clear, the base/background rate is constant around 0.14. some fluctuations are going to happen, but that's the background noise.
the spike at 20:00 is from having both of the type j bulbs running, which was 250 W, in total. these remain small numbers as isolated spikes, but an extra 0.24 is significantly higher than the base rate, which includes two led bulbs. and, running .24 for 5 hours a day adds up to 35 kwh/month - nearly a third of my target.
the spike at 11:00 is from running the 100 W bulb, which took up 0.11 of the 0.24, indicating that the 150 W bulb took up 0.13. see, that's counter-intuitive, and part of what i wanted to check. i'll verify that tomorrow afternoon.
the new bulbs should be running at roughly a tenth of the power, and if i can cut that 35 down to 4 then i'm most of the way towards renormalizing my usage.
i'll check the other switch tonight, after 19:00.
but, "cultural marxism" is not a conspiracy theory. it is the same thing as "neo-conservatism"; remember - these people were all trostykists. were. and, that is the error that the right makes - they get the whole thing backwards. and, don't they always?
these are the same types of people that think that removing the state will lead to a spontaneous mass respect towards property rights, because they don't understand that the state doesn't just happen to uphold those rights but exists for that exact purpose.
it's no secret that the people that build the world we live in today were, in fact, marxists in the past. the blueprint is in the pnac. and, they've been open about their utilization of marxist theory to advance their imperialist agenda.
nor is this without historical precedent, as was documented by the likes of quigley and sutton - both of whom had access to deep resources in order to understand what was happening around them. nor has it escaped the understanding of prominent leftist historians, like zinn and chomsky, both of whom have written extensively on the topic, but who understand the idea as a vulgar marxism rather than as cultural marxism.
zizek in a lot of ways is a good example of "cultural marxism" in the actual sense, as he is a leftist academic that has moved hard to the right, albeit for financial gain. a more disappointing example was christopher hitchens.
nor is the confusion around the situation new, either, as this is the same thesis put forward by the john birch society in the middle of the last century, which is the ideological origins of the koch brothers.
and, who came up with the idea that the illuminati is a satanic group, or that freethinkers and masons were in league with the devil? it was the catholic church, who were seeking to fight back against a movement that it saw as a threat to it's own power - and rightly so, as the liberalism expounded by these groups eventually did the church in, didn't it?
it is a measurable phenomenon over what is now the last several decades, more than the last century, that powerful capitalists have found insights within marx that they've understood are ways to better help them win the class war. we used to call this vulgar. today, we call it cultural.
read sutton and move forwards; he understood this quite well. so, for example, he understood that when the rockefellers and the morgan interests generously funded the bolsheviks, it was not out of any affinity with marxism, but because they wanted to capture the russian market, which was newly opening up out of czarist backwardsness. by putting a one party dictatorship in power, they could avoid the waste and bureaucracy associated with free markets, and jump directly to an efficient domination over russian consumption. and, that is, in fact broadly what happened - and what defines our understanding of this concept of "state capitalism".
likewise, any good conservative capitalist standing in 2018 should be well aware of the necessity of religion in upholding a system that is fraying at the seams. i have repeatedly posted a fragment from socialism: utopian and scientific that goes over the differences in the british and german bourgeoisie, in relation to the maintenance of a religious middle class. it was, after all, the socialists that argued that if religion is allowed to collapse then capitalism will collapse with it - this was not initially a hegelian warning from nietszche, but a socialist tactic. and, so, should we be surprised that capital seeks to replace the dying culture of christianity with a model that appears to be so much more successful? and, might these useful idiots on the left ought to be more in opposition than the reactionary christians, about it?
was marx himself not a capitalist? and did he not utilize his own tools in this manner, as well? was marx himself not the first vulgar marxist?
see, it's one thing to redirect these people towards better sources of information, but it's another to shut them down altogether. what's happening is that they're being effectively co-opted, and in that sense peterson is no less ignorant than his followers are. there's a worthwhile observation in there. indeed, the conspiracy theory is intended to obscure this worthwhile observation - as all good conspiracy theories are.
these are the same types of people that think that removing the state will lead to a spontaneous mass respect towards property rights, because they don't understand that the state doesn't just happen to uphold those rights but exists for that exact purpose.
it's no secret that the people that build the world we live in today were, in fact, marxists in the past. the blueprint is in the pnac. and, they've been open about their utilization of marxist theory to advance their imperialist agenda.
nor is this without historical precedent, as was documented by the likes of quigley and sutton - both of whom had access to deep resources in order to understand what was happening around them. nor has it escaped the understanding of prominent leftist historians, like zinn and chomsky, both of whom have written extensively on the topic, but who understand the idea as a vulgar marxism rather than as cultural marxism.
zizek in a lot of ways is a good example of "cultural marxism" in the actual sense, as he is a leftist academic that has moved hard to the right, albeit for financial gain. a more disappointing example was christopher hitchens.
nor is the confusion around the situation new, either, as this is the same thesis put forward by the john birch society in the middle of the last century, which is the ideological origins of the koch brothers.
and, who came up with the idea that the illuminati is a satanic group, or that freethinkers and masons were in league with the devil? it was the catholic church, who were seeking to fight back against a movement that it saw as a threat to it's own power - and rightly so, as the liberalism expounded by these groups eventually did the church in, didn't it?
it is a measurable phenomenon over what is now the last several decades, more than the last century, that powerful capitalists have found insights within marx that they've understood are ways to better help them win the class war. we used to call this vulgar. today, we call it cultural.
read sutton and move forwards; he understood this quite well. so, for example, he understood that when the rockefellers and the morgan interests generously funded the bolsheviks, it was not out of any affinity with marxism, but because they wanted to capture the russian market, which was newly opening up out of czarist backwardsness. by putting a one party dictatorship in power, they could avoid the waste and bureaucracy associated with free markets, and jump directly to an efficient domination over russian consumption. and, that is, in fact broadly what happened - and what defines our understanding of this concept of "state capitalism".
likewise, any good conservative capitalist standing in 2018 should be well aware of the necessity of religion in upholding a system that is fraying at the seams. i have repeatedly posted a fragment from socialism: utopian and scientific that goes over the differences in the british and german bourgeoisie, in relation to the maintenance of a religious middle class. it was, after all, the socialists that argued that if religion is allowed to collapse then capitalism will collapse with it - this was not initially a hegelian warning from nietszche, but a socialist tactic. and, so, should we be surprised that capital seeks to replace the dying culture of christianity with a model that appears to be so much more successful? and, might these useful idiots on the left ought to be more in opposition than the reactionary christians, about it?
was marx himself not a capitalist? and did he not utilize his own tools in this manner, as well? was marx himself not the first vulgar marxist?
see, it's one thing to redirect these people towards better sources of information, but it's another to shut them down altogether. what's happening is that they're being effectively co-opted, and in that sense peterson is no less ignorant than his followers are. there's a worthwhile observation in there. indeed, the conspiracy theory is intended to obscure this worthwhile observation - as all good conspiracy theories are.
ok. so, that should deal with that problem, even if the lights don't get here until next month.
i don't know why, but the fixtures in here are very diverse. i have lights around the apartment that take normal bulbs, and got a deal on them at canadian tire - $0.50/bulb. so, i have a lot of led lights - but i also have a great need for them, as there are 14 sockets in the unit, including the stove and two lamps. i'm only usually going to have two-four on at one time.
there is also a total of five spotlights in the unit - three in the front hallway and two in the kitchen. two of these burnt out quite quickly, and i bought some at canadian tire, for $4 each. i had a stranded $31 sitting in my ebay account, so i spent $11 on 5 replacement spotlights. that's half-price, but they might not be here until january. it will cut 50W bulbs down to 9W. i'll have to test these switches, too.
somebody on e-bay had exactly the right replacement for the type j bulbs for me - 18 mm across to replace the standard 16/17 halogens. everything on amazon was pushing 25 mm. i got 4 of them for the two sockets, a fresh pair plus a replacement, for $13. so, my $31 is now $7, but my actual account has been spared - it feels free, but i will need to transfer the money back in over time (this is leftover money from sales at my bandcamp site). this is going to replace a 100 W and a 150 W bulb with two 15 W bulbs. so, it should still be very bright, but at a tenth of the cost. some time before january...
and, i got a 2-pack of led par20s for the bathroom. this is going to take me from 175 W all the way down to 9 W and should be here much sooner. $17, so $8.50 each. but, again: i had a $23 credit at amazon that was actually put there by accident, so these light bulbs are actually free.
i may put the other par 20 on the front step; again, i'll have to test the switch
i'll do all the right testing once the new bulbs come in, and we'll see what the difference is.
i don't know why, but the fixtures in here are very diverse. i have lights around the apartment that take normal bulbs, and got a deal on them at canadian tire - $0.50/bulb. so, i have a lot of led lights - but i also have a great need for them, as there are 14 sockets in the unit, including the stove and two lamps. i'm only usually going to have two-four on at one time.
there is also a total of five spotlights in the unit - three in the front hallway and two in the kitchen. two of these burnt out quite quickly, and i bought some at canadian tire, for $4 each. i had a stranded $31 sitting in my ebay account, so i spent $11 on 5 replacement spotlights. that's half-price, but they might not be here until january. it will cut 50W bulbs down to 9W. i'll have to test these switches, too.
somebody on e-bay had exactly the right replacement for the type j bulbs for me - 18 mm across to replace the standard 16/17 halogens. everything on amazon was pushing 25 mm. i got 4 of them for the two sockets, a fresh pair plus a replacement, for $13. so, my $31 is now $7, but my actual account has been spared - it feels free, but i will need to transfer the money back in over time (this is leftover money from sales at my bandcamp site). this is going to replace a 100 W and a 150 W bulb with two 15 W bulbs. so, it should still be very bright, but at a tenth of the cost. some time before january...
and, i got a 2-pack of led par20s for the bathroom. this is going to take me from 175 W all the way down to 9 W and should be here much sooner. $17, so $8.50 each. but, again: i had a $23 credit at amazon that was actually put there by accident, so these light bulbs are actually free.
i may put the other par 20 on the front step; again, i'll have to test the switch
i'll do all the right testing once the new bulbs come in, and we'll see what the difference is.
on third thought, i should be able to get what i want in there.
i have about 5 mms from the base of the fixture to the socket for the bulb. but, then i have another 5 mm to play with to get to the center of the socket. so, anything with about ten cm from the socket should fit - and i did see some of these
i still have a $25 credit at amazon, so that's probably the best way to approach this.
i have about 5 mms from the base of the fixture to the socket for the bulb. but, then i have another 5 mm to play with to get to the center of the socket. so, anything with about ten cm from the socket should fit - and i did see some of these
i still have a $25 credit at amazon, so that's probably the best way to approach this.
i've been shopping for bulbs all night.
on second thought, it seems like these bulbs may be difficult to replace due to the geometry of the fixture. i only have a few mm to play with, and the replacements are all quite wide. i might not be able to find a bulb that fits.
we'll see what kind of data comes back. what i did was turn everything off except the background use - two led bulbs in the bedroom, appliances (including the modem) and the laptop/monitor setup in the bedroom - and leave the lights in the bathroom on for one hour each, over three combinations - both bulbs, and then each separately. that should let me understand what kind of usage i can assign directly to the bulbs, and whether it's really as bad as it seems. the background is about 0.15. the two of them running together is probably going to be as high as 0.5, indicating that each of them is equal to the background. and, when a single bulb is equal to all of the appliances, two led bulbs and a computer, that bulb is a problem that needs to go.
if it's as bad as i think, i may just take the bulbs out and buy a lamp, instead. or, if i can find an led floodlight, i could just stick with that.
i now need to test the other switch through three combinations - just the fan, the fan & the led and the fan & the ir light. this will help me understand just how bad the ir light is, and whether it's really worthwhile to replace it or not.
on second thought, it seems like these bulbs may be difficult to replace due to the geometry of the fixture. i only have a few mm to play with, and the replacements are all quite wide. i might not be able to find a bulb that fits.
we'll see what kind of data comes back. what i did was turn everything off except the background use - two led bulbs in the bedroom, appliances (including the modem) and the laptop/monitor setup in the bedroom - and leave the lights in the bathroom on for one hour each, over three combinations - both bulbs, and then each separately. that should let me understand what kind of usage i can assign directly to the bulbs, and whether it's really as bad as it seems. the background is about 0.15. the two of them running together is probably going to be as high as 0.5, indicating that each of them is equal to the background. and, when a single bulb is equal to all of the appliances, two led bulbs and a computer, that bulb is a problem that needs to go.
if it's as bad as i think, i may just take the bulbs out and buy a lamp, instead. or, if i can find an led floodlight, i could just stick with that.
i now need to test the other switch through three combinations - just the fan, the fan & the led and the fan & the ir light. this will help me understand just how bad the ir light is, and whether it's really worthwhile to replace it or not.
zizek is of course a master of projection.
but, he beat me to the claim of dishonesty.
and, this might be the only argument i ever take his side on.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jordan-peterson-clinical-psychologist-canada-popularity-convincing-why-left-wing-alt-right-cathy-a8208301.html
but, he beat me to the claim of dishonesty.
and, this might be the only argument i ever take his side on.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jordan-peterson-clinical-psychologist-canada-popularity-convincing-why-left-wing-alt-right-cathy-a8208301.html
the person that peterson reminds me of most is zizek - he appeals mostly to uneducated white men who never went to university, who get some kind of ego boost from thinking that they're finally being allowed to engage in a debate that they were never previously permitted to engage in, because nobody ever thought they were intelligent enough to engage in it. but, there's essentially nothing of substance to what he's saying, and when he's not being dishonest, he's being distracting.
and, he is deeply dishonest.
the surreal thing is that you'll see him being presented on the other side of the argument - as though freud or jung should be taken more seriously than derrida or lacan, or foucault. you've just moved across the rhine. it's the same bullshit. and, the guy really belongs in the same category as much of what his proponents are trying to contrast him against.
as mentioned: i don't want to engage in this debate, because i don't think it's worth my time. other than to clarify the facts of the situation when he attempts to distort them, that is to fact check him, he's really broadly not worth responding to.
and, that is my suggestion to dealing with him - don't bother engaging him. just fact check him and leave it at that.
and, he is deeply dishonest.
the surreal thing is that you'll see him being presented on the other side of the argument - as though freud or jung should be taken more seriously than derrida or lacan, or foucault. you've just moved across the rhine. it's the same bullshit. and, the guy really belongs in the same category as much of what his proponents are trying to contrast him against.
as mentioned: i don't want to engage in this debate, because i don't think it's worth my time. other than to clarify the facts of the situation when he attempts to distort them, that is to fact check him, he's really broadly not worth responding to.
and, that is my suggestion to dealing with him - don't bother engaging him. just fact check him and leave it at that.
Sunday, November 4, 2018
so, i'm going to need to replace all of the lighting in the bathroom. in addition to the 175 W bulb, it turns out that the two fixtures both have type j bulbs in them, of 100 W and 130 W, respectively. so, even taking that big bulb out still leaves me with over 200 W worth of lighting in the bathroom. it was over 400 W initially...and, together, this may have been the cause of the spikes....
i can't just put a bulb into those type j fixtures. i think i can order led replacements, but i'm running a test right now to see if it's cost effective.
i might also be able to get a better replacement for that 175 W bulb.
that will be the last thing to do in the bathroom....but i really want to get through august, first.
i can't just put a bulb into those type j fixtures. i think i can order led replacements, but i'm running a test right now to see if it's cost effective.
i might also be able to get a better replacement for that 175 W bulb.
that will be the last thing to do in the bathroom....but i really want to get through august, first.
i don't want to watch his videos.
i don't want to read his writings.
i don't want to debate his ideas, or debunk his nonsense.
i simply don't want to acknowledge he exists - because he shouldn't exist. not in the 21st century, anyways. the 1st, maybe - but not the 21st.
call me post-millennial, but i'm baffled that anybody could take him seriously - and i refuse to do it.
i don't want to read his writings.
i don't want to debate his ideas, or debunk his nonsense.
i simply don't want to acknowledge he exists - because he shouldn't exist. not in the 21st century, anyways. the 1st, maybe - but not the 21st.
call me post-millennial, but i'm baffled that anybody could take him seriously - and i refuse to do it.
the reality is that cenk is a republican, so the fact that he's arguing
from the right here is not surprising - he usually argues from the
right of the spectrum. and, the reason tucker carlson is so dangerous is
that he isn't stupid. but, however disingenuously, or however
capriciously, or however tactically, tucker is actually taking the left
side of the debate, here. and, i'm left to wonder - how much of a
pattern is this? are the post-ideological nihilists in the republican
intelligentsia actually purposefully taking advantage of the democratic
party's re-embrace of conservative values, to try and reposition
themselves as the populist left, as they were in the nineteenth century?
has the spectrum flipped that dramatically?
i mean, i'm used to recoiling against cenk for pretending he's a representative of the left, and coming off as a liberal republican - because that's what he is. but, i'm also used to being revolted by tucker carlson for being a post-ideological nihilist. so, i should know better. but, i can nonetheless see the truth as clearly as it exists.
i mean, i'm used to recoiling against cenk for pretending he's a representative of the left, and coming off as a liberal republican - because that's what he is. but, i'm also used to being revolted by tucker carlson for being a post-ideological nihilist. so, i should know better. but, i can nonetheless see the truth as clearly as it exists.
but, it's typical of a post-modern epistemology to ignore the facts and focus on the perceptions, isn't it? this rovian idea that the facts don't matter, that masquerades on the left but belongs to the hard right.
you will excuse me for reasserting enlightenment values and insisting upon a return to empiricism; if you want to change perceptions, you really need to focus on changing the facts that produced them.
you will excuse me for reasserting enlightenment values and insisting upon a return to empiricism; if you want to change perceptions, you really need to focus on changing the facts that produced them.
but, i've pointed this out repeatedly - we should not be looking to the liberals to support social housing, or take advantage of the surge in refugees to fix the pre-existing housing crisis. we should expect the liberals to sound like liberals, and push for what benefits capital - and excess population levels always benefit capital by driving down labour costs. that's why the democrats support migrant inflows. this is all very easily understandable. at best, we should expect the liberals to put in place social systems that benefit capital, and that benefit all of us in the process - because we should at least expect the liberals to be smart about it, from a capitalist perspective.
nor are the conservatives going to do anything for the poor, either; that idea is comical.
we should be looking to the ndp for this. and, it's their rhetoric - which is trying to outliberal the liberals - that is what is so staunchly disappointing.
there was a great opportunity to take advantage of a crisis here, and they squandered it.
nor are the conservatives going to do anything for the poor, either; that idea is comical.
we should be looking to the ndp for this. and, it's their rhetoric - which is trying to outliberal the liberals - that is what is so staunchly disappointing.
there was a great opportunity to take advantage of a crisis here, and they squandered it.
Saturday, November 3, 2018
you don't get it, ahmed.
i don't care about refugees. at all. what i care about is housing.
immigration is not a ballot question and will not affect my voting decisions. but, access to housing is an important election question for people living on the margins.
it is true that the housing problem already existed. but, it's also true that the existing housing problem made housing the influx of refugees next to impossible, and turned an existing problem into a full-on crisis for the native-born population. it's perhaps not the refugees' fault, but that's not a reason to stop them from flowing in - whether they're to blame for it or not, their presence is continuing to exacerbate the problem. i'm not interested in assigning blame, i'm interested in finding a solution. and, you can't deport canadians to make way for nigerians, even if i suspect that's what you'd really like to do.
so, i don't want you to launch a pr campaign to help soften the image of refugees; i want you to fix the social housing problem. and, nothing short of fixing the housing problem is going to change the perception that they're creating an unwanted strain - because it happens to be an objective fact that they actually are.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-hussen-immigration-matters-campaign-1.4887252
i don't care about refugees. at all. what i care about is housing.
immigration is not a ballot question and will not affect my voting decisions. but, access to housing is an important election question for people living on the margins.
it is true that the housing problem already existed. but, it's also true that the existing housing problem made housing the influx of refugees next to impossible, and turned an existing problem into a full-on crisis for the native-born population. it's perhaps not the refugees' fault, but that's not a reason to stop them from flowing in - whether they're to blame for it or not, their presence is continuing to exacerbate the problem. i'm not interested in assigning blame, i'm interested in finding a solution. and, you can't deport canadians to make way for nigerians, even if i suspect that's what you'd really like to do.
so, i don't want you to launch a pr campaign to help soften the image of refugees; i want you to fix the social housing problem. and, nothing short of fixing the housing problem is going to change the perception that they're creating an unwanted strain - because it happens to be an objective fact that they actually are.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-hussen-immigration-matters-campaign-1.4887252
yeah, it's that damned light bulb - not twice as much, but five times as much. and, there were no spikes yesterday evening, so we'll have to see if it stays that way.
presuming there are no unaccounted for spikes, i should be able to keep the bill under $50 by keeping the usage low for the next week. and, the oesp kicks in on the 26th, meaning i should get about half the month covered.
as of right now, i expect that i'll pay the set up cost and push the rest over. and, if i can really keep to an average of 4 kwh/day for the winter, it should be paid down by the new year.
i didn't check my email yesterday, but i finally got a response from the police complaint i made in mid sept. they are launching an investigation under the lead of the windsor police; i responded back with a request for an independent review, as there's a conflict of interest on the file. we'll see how they react to that.
presuming there are no unaccounted for spikes, i should be able to keep the bill under $50 by keeping the usage low for the next week. and, the oesp kicks in on the 26th, meaning i should get about half the month covered.
as of right now, i expect that i'll pay the set up cost and push the rest over. and, if i can really keep to an average of 4 kwh/day for the winter, it should be paid down by the new year.
i didn't check my email yesterday, but i finally got a response from the police complaint i made in mid sept. they are launching an investigation under the lead of the windsor police; i responded back with a request for an independent review, as there's a conflict of interest on the file. we'll see how they react to that.
regarding the smoke down here.
i dunno.
i'm still cleaning up the dust from having the dryer on for the last two weeks. i'm coughing as a consequence of something or other, but i can't get a clean signal, yet.
it seems to get better when i lysol the surfaces around the bed - and it's certainly picking up a lot of dust, of unclear origin (although the dryer is a clear partial source).
i have no clear determination yet, but that's something else i'll be checking for over the weekend.
i dunno.
i'm still cleaning up the dust from having the dryer on for the last two weeks. i'm coughing as a consequence of something or other, but i can't get a clean signal, yet.
it seems to get better when i lysol the surfaces around the bed - and it's certainly picking up a lot of dust, of unclear origin (although the dryer is a clear partial source).
i have no clear determination yet, but that's something else i'll be checking for over the weekend.
now, regarding how i'm going to deal with this...
i had a $270 credit in the last apartment, and i'm not sure if they should have cut me a check or not. they didn't. i'm going to have to call the program on monday to find out. but, it indicates that i shouldn't expect to be paying much for hydro, if anything at all, once i get used to where the costs are in this unit. i expect to rebuild that credit.
in the short term, i need to figure out whether i am really paying for hot water or not. if i am, i'm going to have to change the terms of the credit to the intensive service, which is an extra $20 a month.
regardless, i'm going to behave as though the credit is retroactive, even though everybody insists that it isn't. so, if i ended up with a $70 bill, and i think i'm paying hot water, i will put in a payment for $2 and wait until the credit builds up to take care of the costs - or $25 if i'm convinced that i'm not.
if i'm not on the hot water circuit, i expect the bills down here to be in the $30-40 range, so it will take a few months to catch up. otherwise, i guess i'm expecting it to be in the $50-60 range, and will need to get on the appropriate program to adjust.
i had a $270 credit in the last apartment, and i'm not sure if they should have cut me a check or not. they didn't. i'm going to have to call the program on monday to find out. but, it indicates that i shouldn't expect to be paying much for hydro, if anything at all, once i get used to where the costs are in this unit. i expect to rebuild that credit.
in the short term, i need to figure out whether i am really paying for hot water or not. if i am, i'm going to have to change the terms of the credit to the intensive service, which is an extra $20 a month.
regardless, i'm going to behave as though the credit is retroactive, even though everybody insists that it isn't. so, if i ended up with a $70 bill, and i think i'm paying hot water, i will put in a payment for $2 and wait until the credit builds up to take care of the costs - or $25 if i'm convinced that i'm not.
if i'm not on the hot water circuit, i expect the bills down here to be in the $30-40 range, so it will take a few months to catch up. otherwise, i guess i'm expecting it to be in the $50-60 range, and will need to get on the appropriate program to adjust.
Friday, November 2, 2018
so, i got my cleaning done - the bathroom and kitchen are both totally done, cleaned and completed for long term tenancy. it's actually a very nice bathroom, and i'm happy about that. next up will be the second bedroom, which i'm using as a dining/living room & library. it's big enough for a couch and a table with a laptop/tv on it - and some shelves in the corner. but, i'm going to get through 08/16 first. hopefully, i can get a good chuck down by the end of the weekend.
i also got my first electricity bill and was a little thrown off by it.
i was expecting something a little higher due to the fact that i've done something like 40 loads of laundry this month. but, a closer look at the information pulled out a lot of spikes that i can't currently account for and i'm going to have to figure out why. my immediate suspicion is that i may have the hot water tank attached to my circuit, meaning i'd be paying for heating...
frankly, that's not the end of the world. i don't mind paying my own hot water in theory, it's just that the lease says the landlord is supposed to pay for it. so, if i can convince myself that this is actually what's happening, i guess we need to figure out if it's intentional or not, first. but, i may actually prefer to see a small rent reduction - $20 or $30 - and send the cost to the oesp, instead. due to the way the system works, i'd rather take the costs on my myself, because i can offload them. i just wish he was upfront about it.
i need to be clear: i haven't convinced myself of this, yet. i'm going to need to check the hourly usage and piece it together. but, it is the initial hypothesis.
the background rate also seemed unusually high. in my last apartment, i was using 3-5 kwh base - meaning things like lights and appliances, and the laptop that i have on pretty much all of the time. it's more like 8 here. that's almost twice as much, and there isn't a good reason for it.
the only thing that i can finger as the cause - and the data seems to support it - is the light bulb in the bathroom. i guessed that this thing might be a little more powerful than i'd like, but i seem to have drastically underestimated it. it turns out that it's actually a "heat lamp" rather than a bulb. 175 W. i didn't really look at it or analyze it, but now that i am doing so, having this one bulb on for a few hours a day may have literally doubled my base electrical costs.
i took it out this evening and replaced it with a regular bulb. we'll see what kind of difference that makes over time.
so, i'll be in bed for the next few days, focusing on the rebuild - and carefully keeping track of my electricity usage.
i also got my first electricity bill and was a little thrown off by it.
i was expecting something a little higher due to the fact that i've done something like 40 loads of laundry this month. but, a closer look at the information pulled out a lot of spikes that i can't currently account for and i'm going to have to figure out why. my immediate suspicion is that i may have the hot water tank attached to my circuit, meaning i'd be paying for heating...
frankly, that's not the end of the world. i don't mind paying my own hot water in theory, it's just that the lease says the landlord is supposed to pay for it. so, if i can convince myself that this is actually what's happening, i guess we need to figure out if it's intentional or not, first. but, i may actually prefer to see a small rent reduction - $20 or $30 - and send the cost to the oesp, instead. due to the way the system works, i'd rather take the costs on my myself, because i can offload them. i just wish he was upfront about it.
i need to be clear: i haven't convinced myself of this, yet. i'm going to need to check the hourly usage and piece it together. but, it is the initial hypothesis.
the background rate also seemed unusually high. in my last apartment, i was using 3-5 kwh base - meaning things like lights and appliances, and the laptop that i have on pretty much all of the time. it's more like 8 here. that's almost twice as much, and there isn't a good reason for it.
the only thing that i can finger as the cause - and the data seems to support it - is the light bulb in the bathroom. i guessed that this thing might be a little more powerful than i'd like, but i seem to have drastically underestimated it. it turns out that it's actually a "heat lamp" rather than a bulb. 175 W. i didn't really look at it or analyze it, but now that i am doing so, having this one bulb on for a few hours a day may have literally doubled my base electrical costs.
so, i'll be in bed for the next few days, focusing on the rebuild - and carefully keeping track of my electricity usage.
if they want to save money on social assistance, what should they
actually do? and, i support some of these things for other reasons.
remember: as a recipient, it is also in my interests to reduce the
number of people on assistance, as i get better access to the services,
that way.
1) better access to abortion and contraception services, including working to remove stigmas around abortion and contraception that are erected by conservative religious groups. whether we're talking about welfare or disability, it is the perpetuation of the cycle of poverty and addiction that is the biggest factor creating dependence. reducing birth rates amongst people that live on social assistance should be the dominant priority, as the science is clear that most of the people born into the system will in fact remain within it.
2) renegotiate resettlement terms with the federal government to take in more immigrants and fewer refugees. single able-bodied male refugees should be given higher priority for resettlement than families or dependent women and children. listen: if you want to save costs, this is something that will actually work. the liberal theory here is wrong - most of these kids will end up dependent.
3) build more subsidized housing. in the long run, this will reduce costs related to transient housing, including running shelters and food banks, and transfer costs from providing services for vagrants to giving them money to spend, which cycles money back into the economy, producing multiplier effects.
4) provide greater access to secular addictions counselling. the 12-step program is a cult that fosters dependency on itself. we have a lot of science on the topic at our disposal; we should stop relying on these religious groups and start using it.
5) reduce barriers to accessing education, including the costs to education.
1) better access to abortion and contraception services, including working to remove stigmas around abortion and contraception that are erected by conservative religious groups. whether we're talking about welfare or disability, it is the perpetuation of the cycle of poverty and addiction that is the biggest factor creating dependence. reducing birth rates amongst people that live on social assistance should be the dominant priority, as the science is clear that most of the people born into the system will in fact remain within it.
2) renegotiate resettlement terms with the federal government to take in more immigrants and fewer refugees. single able-bodied male refugees should be given higher priority for resettlement than families or dependent women and children. listen: if you want to save costs, this is something that will actually work. the liberal theory here is wrong - most of these kids will end up dependent.
3) build more subsidized housing. in the long run, this will reduce costs related to transient housing, including running shelters and food banks, and transfer costs from providing services for vagrants to giving them money to spend, which cycles money back into the economy, producing multiplier effects.
4) provide greater access to secular addictions counselling. the 12-step program is a cult that fosters dependency on itself. we have a lot of science on the topic at our disposal; we should stop relying on these religious groups and start using it.
5) reduce barriers to accessing education, including the costs to education.
if they're serious about this on a fiscal level - and not just appealing to the base calivinistic instincts that dominate in the lowest common denominator of society - then simply cutting rates would be devastatingly stupid, as they're going to spend twice as much on policing and court costs (as well as incarceration costs) from the increase in crime that follows. and, we don't have a slave labour prison system, so the incentive towards mass incarceration doesn't exist, either - except at the complex level. we do have some privately owned prisons. i guess putting us all in jail would require building more prisons...
the thing is that we already know that this government is, in fact, devastatingly stupid - and will do many devastatingly stupid things until we can get rid of them.
i think what you should expect is some kind of workfare. that might not save any money in the end, but it won't cost them anything, and it's the most direct way to play to their base of religious fundamentalists.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/ontario-social-assistance-100-day-review-1.4884242
the thing is that we already know that this government is, in fact, devastatingly stupid - and will do many devastatingly stupid things until we can get rid of them.
i think what you should expect is some kind of workfare. that might not save any money in the end, but it won't cost them anything, and it's the most direct way to play to their base of religious fundamentalists.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/ontario-social-assistance-100-day-review-1.4884242
Thursday, November 1, 2018
i had a long sleep, so hopefully this acts as a partition point back to normalcy. i need to actually do that cleaning, tonight. finally.
so, i came back with a pair of black vans with pink laces that are sort of like old airwalks (except not as strongly built around the heels) and a pair of black platform puma nearly-classics (the heel is more like a dress shoe) that should take a very long time to walk through, because they have a three inch sole. but, i still wanted my sparkly pink running shoes...
i've mentioned before that i have absurdly small feet. i do prefer women's shoes, but if a specific brand or line of men's shoes don't come in the smallest category, i generally can't find men's shoes that fit, anyways. those hiking boots are size 7, mens - and i'd be better off with 6.5s. the black vans are 8.5, womens. the pumas are 9s, womens, but the 7s at the display fit - snugly. and, the boots i was wearing walking in were size 6, children. the airwalks were also female shoes, size 9. my rainboots are kids boots. etc.
i just did a quick size comparison, and it would suggest that my feet are 9.5-9.75" - about median for grown women, and in the adolescent range for men. a size 6 or 7 mens shoe is really meant for fourteen or fifteen year old boys that have outgrown the kids shoes but haven't grown into the men's shoes, yet.
it actually gives me some flexibility, as it means i have a lot more choice - i can shop at the very bottom of the men's range, at the very top of the kid's range or in the middle of the women's range. and, the sparkly pink shoes i wanted are really kids shoes...
so, that had some classic pumas in kid sizes, but only up to 6 - and the pair on the shelf fit, but i wanted to opt for a 7. none in stock. i decided to wait it out.
i crashed when i got home and eventually ordered a kids pair early in the morning. they also had the same shoes in purple for mens, but nothing in my size. and, i'm thinking this is my answer, moving forward - until comfortable skate shoes come back into fashion, or somebody decides they're worth making, again.
and, then i learned there's a puma store in windsor, too - and that i perhaps should have gone there in the first place.
when they get here, i'll have to revaluate. are the platforms really the best idea, or should i look for a pair of classics instead? the difference is really in the heel. the classics were built up far better and may be far more comfortable. so, am i better off with the ridiculous sole and the questionable heel, or should i meet the situation halfway?
i also decided that i'm going to need to get a fourth pair for bicycling, and these should be in the super cheap variety. like, a twenty dollar pair at walmart sort of thing. i'm just a little concerned about snapping the soles, and think that the bike may have contributed to the airwalks' short life span.
so, i came back with a pair of black vans with pink laces that are sort of like old airwalks (except not as strongly built around the heels) and a pair of black platform puma nearly-classics (the heel is more like a dress shoe) that should take a very long time to walk through, because they have a three inch sole. but, i still wanted my sparkly pink running shoes...
i've mentioned before that i have absurdly small feet. i do prefer women's shoes, but if a specific brand or line of men's shoes don't come in the smallest category, i generally can't find men's shoes that fit, anyways. those hiking boots are size 7, mens - and i'd be better off with 6.5s. the black vans are 8.5, womens. the pumas are 9s, womens, but the 7s at the display fit - snugly. and, the boots i was wearing walking in were size 6, children. the airwalks were also female shoes, size 9. my rainboots are kids boots. etc.
i just did a quick size comparison, and it would suggest that my feet are 9.5-9.75" - about median for grown women, and in the adolescent range for men. a size 6 or 7 mens shoe is really meant for fourteen or fifteen year old boys that have outgrown the kids shoes but haven't grown into the men's shoes, yet.
it actually gives me some flexibility, as it means i have a lot more choice - i can shop at the very bottom of the men's range, at the very top of the kid's range or in the middle of the women's range. and, the sparkly pink shoes i wanted are really kids shoes...
so, that had some classic pumas in kid sizes, but only up to 6 - and the pair on the shelf fit, but i wanted to opt for a 7. none in stock. i decided to wait it out.
i crashed when i got home and eventually ordered a kids pair early in the morning. they also had the same shoes in purple for mens, but nothing in my size. and, i'm thinking this is my answer, moving forward - until comfortable skate shoes come back into fashion, or somebody decides they're worth making, again.
and, then i learned there's a puma store in windsor, too - and that i perhaps should have gone there in the first place.
when they get here, i'll have to revaluate. are the platforms really the best idea, or should i look for a pair of classics instead? the difference is really in the heel. the classics were built up far better and may be far more comfortable. so, am i better off with the ridiculous sole and the questionable heel, or should i meet the situation halfway?
i also decided that i'm going to need to get a fourth pair for bicycling, and these should be in the super cheap variety. like, a twenty dollar pair at walmart sort of thing. i'm just a little concerned about snapping the soles, and think that the bike may have contributed to the airwalks' short life span.
the last week was kind of weird. i kept planning around finishing all of the shopping before cleaning the bathroom, taking a shower and getting to work on 08/16. but, i ended up sleeping most of the day on monday - although i got everything finished in the evening except a compost run & a run to the mall to get shoes. then, i tried to stay up all night tuesday, got lost posting about those pictures, tried to waste a few hours budgeting (which turned into 6 hours) and crashed in the middle of the day. i woke up late on tuesday night and got halfway through the cleaning (including installing a new shower head) before i crashed again on wednesday morning. then, i finally made it out to get some shoes, and came back with two pairs.
at this point, i plan to be in for several days, so i should get to that cleaning and shower, as intended. and, moving forward, i need to plan to shower as soon as i come in, to keep the outside stink from coming in. i don't know the cause, but the pollution is horrific, right now - to the point that i'm wondering if it's dangerous to be biking in it.
i should point out that i also got some new hiking boots on monday night. the winter boots i've been wearing are probably more than sufficient for some time, but they have these hairline cracks in them that are concerning to me. that's something i'll need to look at lacquering or something. i have some shoo goo, but taking shoo goo to hairline cracks seems like the wrong thing to do - i want something more subtle to fill the cracks in and stop them from expanding, not a total rebuild. but, they've been wearing a little on the inside as well, because i've been wearing them all fall because i haven't had any actual shoes. so, i decided a pair of hybrid hiking boots was a responsible purchase. this is footwear that is best used for the fall and spring, when it's wet but not snowy; i think the old boots are probably still the best choice for actual snow, and will be put aside for that reason, so they're not wasted on less pressing circumstances. and, i still have my rain boots, which seem almost indestructible, for splashing through puddles in the summer.
i decided i needed two pairs of shoes - one with very heavy soles that is intended for walking, and a prettier pair for social purposes. i quickly found myself frustrated...
i had this problem last year as well, and it's the reason i bought those airwalks. i need a heavy sole for walking, but i also want a pair of comfortable shoes. the reality is that a market for shoes designed for pre-industrial purposes doesn't seem to exist. oddly. well, most people don't go on six-eight hour walks any more, do they? but, i need shoes that i can walk across town in, and not have to replace the next week...
the heavy sole is usually associated with skateboarding nowadays. and, they used to make very comfortable skate shoes, too. airwalk was famous for it. and, i had a pair of gravis shoes at one point as well, with a very built heel. you really can't find anything like this anymore; skate shoes seem designed to create ankle blisters as some kind of ritualistic form of masochism, nowadays. street cred. i dunno. but, what strikes me as common sense seems to be beyond the interests of these people, who seem happy to bleed through their feet on a daily basis.
the flip side is that the comfortable shoes seem designed to sit by the pool in - i'd destroy most of them in a week.
so, i'm left with a choice between buying slippers that i can't take outside and buying skate shoes that i can't walk a bloc in without starting to bleed at the ankle. the way i put it to one of the workers is "i guess i'm just looking for well constructed shoes, and they don't seem to exist."; her one-liner comeback, which was not lacking in wit, was to cackle and suggest i move to europe. not the worst idea. maybe i could check out some refugee independent canadian rock bands while i'm there...
i solved this problem in 2014 by getting dc shoes that were essentially converse copies, except with better built heels. i won't buy converses due to the blister issue, but what i wanted was a pair of converses that wouldn't create blisters. so, it worked out well. these were the glittery pink/purple shoes i had at the start of the vlogs.
after realizing that dc is dying and finding dc products is hard to do in windsor, i thought i had found a solution in mid-2017 with the airwalk classics. unfortunately, the soles were a kind of a trick - they sure looked like they were durable, but the material seemed designed to crumble. and, this was extra frustrating, because they were so amazingly comfortable, out of the box. what i was looking for was essentially a modern equivalent of the classic airwalks - to not get tricked by the sole, this time.
but, it seemed like i had no real escape. i ended up toying with vans and nikes that didn't look very comfortable and i eventually settled on a pair of puma platforms that reminded me of my old gravis shoes in the sense of the soles being thick. this is a good three inches - no joke.
the weird thing is that they're suede...
it turns out that the pumas classics are perhaps the only shoe left on the market that are close to what i want, in the sense of being well built around the heel and having a durable, rubber sole. airwalk is dead - they didn't even have the cheaply made classics, but just a lot of bad converse and vans copies. dc apparently only makes the wide shoes nowadays, mostly with bad soles. i can't find gravis shoes anywhere. converse is hopeless. the vans seemed better, but just barely. & then they had these skate shoes from nike & reebok & adidas that were just vans or converse copies, with bad heels. so, the sort of ubiquitousness of the bad converse heel amongst thick soled skate shoes has left puma as the only option still standing.
but, they're suede. we'll have to see if i react differently to suede, i guess.
i took a look around on the way out for the second pink pair, and bought a pair of vans that are about an inch higher than the airwalks around the heel ("medium cut"), and have rubber soles, but are otherwise fairly similar (except for colour). the build is a little looser, but i'm thinking of these as airwalk replacements. note to vans: if you built these up just a little bit...
and, i'm passing out. i'll spell check and finish this when i wake up.
at this point, i plan to be in for several days, so i should get to that cleaning and shower, as intended. and, moving forward, i need to plan to shower as soon as i come in, to keep the outside stink from coming in. i don't know the cause, but the pollution is horrific, right now - to the point that i'm wondering if it's dangerous to be biking in it.
i should point out that i also got some new hiking boots on monday night. the winter boots i've been wearing are probably more than sufficient for some time, but they have these hairline cracks in them that are concerning to me. that's something i'll need to look at lacquering or something. i have some shoo goo, but taking shoo goo to hairline cracks seems like the wrong thing to do - i want something more subtle to fill the cracks in and stop them from expanding, not a total rebuild. but, they've been wearing a little on the inside as well, because i've been wearing them all fall because i haven't had any actual shoes. so, i decided a pair of hybrid hiking boots was a responsible purchase. this is footwear that is best used for the fall and spring, when it's wet but not snowy; i think the old boots are probably still the best choice for actual snow, and will be put aside for that reason, so they're not wasted on less pressing circumstances. and, i still have my rain boots, which seem almost indestructible, for splashing through puddles in the summer.
i decided i needed two pairs of shoes - one with very heavy soles that is intended for walking, and a prettier pair for social purposes. i quickly found myself frustrated...
i had this problem last year as well, and it's the reason i bought those airwalks. i need a heavy sole for walking, but i also want a pair of comfortable shoes. the reality is that a market for shoes designed for pre-industrial purposes doesn't seem to exist. oddly. well, most people don't go on six-eight hour walks any more, do they? but, i need shoes that i can walk across town in, and not have to replace the next week...
the heavy sole is usually associated with skateboarding nowadays. and, they used to make very comfortable skate shoes, too. airwalk was famous for it. and, i had a pair of gravis shoes at one point as well, with a very built heel. you really can't find anything like this anymore; skate shoes seem designed to create ankle blisters as some kind of ritualistic form of masochism, nowadays. street cred. i dunno. but, what strikes me as common sense seems to be beyond the interests of these people, who seem happy to bleed through their feet on a daily basis.
the flip side is that the comfortable shoes seem designed to sit by the pool in - i'd destroy most of them in a week.
so, i'm left with a choice between buying slippers that i can't take outside and buying skate shoes that i can't walk a bloc in without starting to bleed at the ankle. the way i put it to one of the workers is "i guess i'm just looking for well constructed shoes, and they don't seem to exist."; her one-liner comeback, which was not lacking in wit, was to cackle and suggest i move to europe. not the worst idea. maybe i could check out some refugee independent canadian rock bands while i'm there...
i solved this problem in 2014 by getting dc shoes that were essentially converse copies, except with better built heels. i won't buy converses due to the blister issue, but what i wanted was a pair of converses that wouldn't create blisters. so, it worked out well. these were the glittery pink/purple shoes i had at the start of the vlogs.
after realizing that dc is dying and finding dc products is hard to do in windsor, i thought i had found a solution in mid-2017 with the airwalk classics. unfortunately, the soles were a kind of a trick - they sure looked like they were durable, but the material seemed designed to crumble. and, this was extra frustrating, because they were so amazingly comfortable, out of the box. what i was looking for was essentially a modern equivalent of the classic airwalks - to not get tricked by the sole, this time.
but, it seemed like i had no real escape. i ended up toying with vans and nikes that didn't look very comfortable and i eventually settled on a pair of puma platforms that reminded me of my old gravis shoes in the sense of the soles being thick. this is a good three inches - no joke.
the weird thing is that they're suede...
it turns out that the pumas classics are perhaps the only shoe left on the market that are close to what i want, in the sense of being well built around the heel and having a durable, rubber sole. airwalk is dead - they didn't even have the cheaply made classics, but just a lot of bad converse and vans copies. dc apparently only makes the wide shoes nowadays, mostly with bad soles. i can't find gravis shoes anywhere. converse is hopeless. the vans seemed better, but just barely. & then they had these skate shoes from nike & reebok & adidas that were just vans or converse copies, with bad heels. so, the sort of ubiquitousness of the bad converse heel amongst thick soled skate shoes has left puma as the only option still standing.
but, they're suede. we'll have to see if i react differently to suede, i guess.
i took a look around on the way out for the second pink pair, and bought a pair of vans that are about an inch higher than the airwalks around the heel ("medium cut"), and have rubber soles, but are otherwise fairly similar (except for colour). the build is a little looser, but i'm thinking of these as airwalk replacements. note to vans: if you built these up just a little bit...
and, i'm passing out. i'll spell check and finish this when i wake up.
if you think there's some equivalency between harmlessly annoying somebody over email and blowing harmful pollution into somebody's apartment, and i'm a hypocrite for standing up for clearly harmless behaviour while aggressively fighting to get myself out of a scenario where the clearly harmful behaviour of others was clearly harming my mental and physical well-being, you need to reread on liberty pretty badly.
and, these are objective analyses.
and, these are objective analyses.
it's actually something halfways between a political deflection and a freudian slip.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/mckenna-calls-conservative-criticism-of-carbon-tax-a-smokescreen-1.4151587
she seems stoically self-aware that she's being lead to slaughter here, as her seat is likely undefendable at the first sign of ndp restrengthening, which is inevitable, eventually. i lived in this riding for many years - it's an ndp riding. so, it's a matter of time.
iirc, the minister has an education in economics. she surely knows that she's peddling absurdity, and is being tasked to do it with a smile.
a very feminist smile.
this is just looking more and more like a gas tax, which may have it's own benefits, but is not going to spur on any kind of transition - it's just going to make gas more expensive, which may or may not lead to a decrease in gas consumption.
and, a gas tax is not a climate plan - it's a smokescreen to distract from the fact that the government doesn't have one.
it's not like we don't know how to do this. we've functionally eliminated all kinds of pollutants - lead, mercury, ddt, etc. and, we did it through regulation and enforcement, not through hokey appeals to a misplaced faith in the theory of markets.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/mckenna-calls-conservative-criticism-of-carbon-tax-a-smokescreen-1.4151587
she seems stoically self-aware that she's being lead to slaughter here, as her seat is likely undefendable at the first sign of ndp restrengthening, which is inevitable, eventually. i lived in this riding for many years - it's an ndp riding. so, it's a matter of time.
iirc, the minister has an education in economics. she surely knows that she's peddling absurdity, and is being tasked to do it with a smile.
a very feminist smile.
this is just looking more and more like a gas tax, which may have it's own benefits, but is not going to spur on any kind of transition - it's just going to make gas more expensive, which may or may not lead to a decrease in gas consumption.
and, a gas tax is not a climate plan - it's a smokescreen to distract from the fact that the government doesn't have one.
it's not like we don't know how to do this. we've functionally eliminated all kinds of pollutants - lead, mercury, ddt, etc. and, we did it through regulation and enforcement, not through hokey appeals to a misplaced faith in the theory of markets.
Tuesday, October 30, 2018
so, there's a migrant caravan coming, and the discourse is whether to allow or deny entry. this is an entirely absurd discourse, that reduces to the question of whether they're useful to local capital or not - if they are useful let them stay, and if they are not, send them back.
how about we be socialists, instead?
why don't we train these people with what they need - which is a combination of educational and military training - and send them back to fix the problems that exist in their own countries? for, we surely recognize that the problems will not fix themselves, and that this is an army of the proletariat - of great revolutionary potential.
and, why don't we fight here in the north to undo the policies that have created the push factors, in the first place? by passing laws in new york, and supporting political movements in washington, we can remove our support for the bodies that are behaving oppressively, and pushing people out of the country.
instead, we debate about whether the labour is useful or not - because we are wholly, thoroughly capitalistic in nature. and, it will be our undoing in the end, one way or another - whether we are taken down from the inside or the outside.
how about we be socialists, instead?
why don't we train these people with what they need - which is a combination of educational and military training - and send them back to fix the problems that exist in their own countries? for, we surely recognize that the problems will not fix themselves, and that this is an army of the proletariat - of great revolutionary potential.
and, why don't we fight here in the north to undo the policies that have created the push factors, in the first place? by passing laws in new york, and supporting political movements in washington, we can remove our support for the bodies that are behaving oppressively, and pushing people out of the country.
instead, we debate about whether the labour is useful or not - because we are wholly, thoroughly capitalistic in nature. and, it will be our undoing in the end, one way or another - whether we are taken down from the inside or the outside.
revolutionary leftists have historically tended to argue in favour of resistance and solidarity with oppressed groups in foreign countries, not in favour of dispersal or migration. shipping dissidents out of the country actually benefits the groups that are doing the oppressing, by clearing out resistance to them. and, the revolutionary left has always had a concept of martyrdom attached to it, as well.
these regimes need to be fought against and torn down, and it's the refugees that have the responsibility of doing this.
the liberal rights theory has generally focused on the benefits of immigration to the absorbing countries, but this requires a process of screening. no government in canada has ever advocated any kind of open border policy, and for good reason - it is not in our economic interests to just let everybody in.
i do support some solidarity with groups that want to use the country as an exile, or with refugees that are looking for temporary shelter. during world war two, the british allowed for many exiled states to operate within london; i support this, absolutely. but, there is a big difference between providing temporary shelter and military support as a means of solidarity in a conflict and allowing for an escape from a conflict that many of these people are morally obligated to involve themselves in - or are fleeing from, out of cowardice. to allow a syrian fleeing from isis permanent refuge is to cede ground to isis - they must be sent back to fight, when they are ready, as this is their fight, and their fight alone.
but, i'm not going to sit here and stand up for some liberal idea of immigration, because i'm not a liberal - i'm a communist. i want to help on some level, but these people have fights that they must engage themselves in for the broader benefit of the planet, and should not be allowed to escape from....this is their fate, their purpose, their identity, and they must accept it, not flee from it.
these regimes need to be fought against and torn down, and it's the refugees that have the responsibility of doing this.
the liberal rights theory has generally focused on the benefits of immigration to the absorbing countries, but this requires a process of screening. no government in canada has ever advocated any kind of open border policy, and for good reason - it is not in our economic interests to just let everybody in.
i do support some solidarity with groups that want to use the country as an exile, or with refugees that are looking for temporary shelter. during world war two, the british allowed for many exiled states to operate within london; i support this, absolutely. but, there is a big difference between providing temporary shelter and military support as a means of solidarity in a conflict and allowing for an escape from a conflict that many of these people are morally obligated to involve themselves in - or are fleeing from, out of cowardice. to allow a syrian fleeing from isis permanent refuge is to cede ground to isis - they must be sent back to fight, when they are ready, as this is their fight, and their fight alone.
but, i'm not going to sit here and stand up for some liberal idea of immigration, because i'm not a liberal - i'm a communist. i want to help on some level, but these people have fights that they must engage themselves in for the broader benefit of the planet, and should not be allowed to escape from....this is their fate, their purpose, their identity, and they must accept it, not flee from it.
we have a severe crisis in access to affordable housing, here.
it has to be one way or the other: we have to build more affordable housing, or we have to crack down on refugees. we can't just leave the doors wide open and let the market deal with it - or we'll become the places that these people are fleeing from.
fwiw, i think building more affordable housing would be the preferable solution, and i've supported refugee resettlement in the past for that reason, even as i've argued for more screening to exclude candidates with low levels of education (because low education levels are correlated with social conservatism, and i don't want to shift the balance of public opinion in the country, although i fear this has already happened). i don't really care about the issue on a moral level, but greater access to affordable housing helps everybody, in the end. but, if the government won't pony up and pay for it, it's going to have to crack down on it.
it's the hands-off status quo that needs to end: build housing to accommodate these people (and everybody else), or enforce the law and throw them out.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cbsa-deportations-border-removals-1.4873169
it has to be one way or the other: we have to build more affordable housing, or we have to crack down on refugees. we can't just leave the doors wide open and let the market deal with it - or we'll become the places that these people are fleeing from.
fwiw, i think building more affordable housing would be the preferable solution, and i've supported refugee resettlement in the past for that reason, even as i've argued for more screening to exclude candidates with low levels of education (because low education levels are correlated with social conservatism, and i don't want to shift the balance of public opinion in the country, although i fear this has already happened). i don't really care about the issue on a moral level, but greater access to affordable housing helps everybody, in the end. but, if the government won't pony up and pay for it, it's going to have to crack down on it.
it's the hands-off status quo that needs to end: build housing to accommodate these people (and everybody else), or enforce the law and throw them out.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cbsa-deportations-border-removals-1.4873169
in fact, freeland's primary job in relation to brazil is to represent canadian mining companies, who are some of the worst human rights abusers in the world, and will no doubt benefit greatly from a return to dictatorship.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tasker-canada-statement-brazil-far-right-1.4882380
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tasker-canada-statement-brazil-far-right-1.4882380
it's been a while. did you think i forgot?
this is all an accounting process, remember. what i'm doing is shifting things around from the $5000 to the court order; i had to refund myself, but i've also dipped back into it...
the 5000:
22.58 (bicycle) +32.77 (shoes) = (6th)
55.35 + ($10 (3 x 40 gb ide hard drives) + 164.40 (2 x 500 gb laptop sshds) + 103.67 (2 gb desktop internal drive) + 43.49 (50 bd-rs) + 27.69 (100 dvd-rs) + 4.22 (usb to ps/2 adapter) + 12.43 (mp3 sd card) + 122.80 (2 tb external hd) + 30.10 (cd-rs) + 47.91 (2x2gb laptop ram) = ) + 26.25 (laptop battery) + 65.85 (2 x 4 gb laptop ram) + 127.94 (rugged smart phone) = 786.75) = (8th/9th)
842.11 + (242.69 (chip) + 51.96 (case) + 361.59 (board) + 150.28 (ram) + 11.06 (thermal paste) + 134.45 (ssd) + 72.34 (psu) + 8.52 (power bar) = 1032.89) = (10th)
1875 + 53.30 (audiophile) -72.34 [cancelled psu] = (11th)
1855.96 + 79.09 [psu] + 10.20 (power bar) - 1.15 (tax error) +176.78 (bathroom stuff) = (12th)
2120.88 +25.52 (bathroom stuff) + 22.50 (keyboard) + 15.40 (mouse) + 54.22 (batteries) = (17th)
2238.52 + 20 (monitor) = (18th)
2258.52 + 116.89 (jewel cases) = (19th)
2375.41 + 82.44 [bathroom stuff] - 11.06 [refund, arctic silver] = (21st)
2446.79 +11.28 (bathroom stuff) + 15 (lamps) = (23rd)
2473.07 + 6 (ups hold) = (24th)
2479.07 + 33.90 (table) + 22.60 (casette deck) = (25th)
2535.57 +30 (bookcase) + 15 (casette holders) = (27th)
2580.57 - 296.02 (hst/bathroom) =
2284.55 + 45.32 (bicycle for detroit) = (august 3rd)
2329.87 + 30.50 (lock) = (8th)
2360.37 + 32.74 (bike pump & failed tubes) (nov 9th) =
2393.11 +200 (deposit) (nov 10th) =
2593.11 + 38.42 [bike tires, tubes] (nov 15th)=
2631.53 - 175 (deposit) (nov 29th)=
2456.53+ [13.56 + 18.74 = 32.30] [shower curtain, dish drainer, etc] [dec 7th]=
2488.83+ 13.22 [tape] [dec 21st/22nd] =
2502.05+ 9.03 [plunger] [dec 24th] =
2511.08+ [20.31 + 11.29 + 31.02*3+ 4.52 + (10.17 - 1.13 = 9.04) + 4.19 = 142.41] [tape/tarps] [over march, 2018] =
2653.49 +(18.08 + 31.02 = 49.10) [tape/tarps] [april 11th] =
2702.59 - [49.10 + 142.41 + 9.03 + 13.22 + 32.30 + 25 = 271.06] [total post-tuscarora reset from court case] =
2431.53 + 20.33 [batteries] [sept 11th] =
2451.86 + 4.51 [internet cable] [oct 12th] =
2456.37 + 158.18 [chrome book] [oct 14th] =
2614.55 + 33.89 [bike gloves] [oct 21st] =
2648.44 - (15 + 33.90 + 30 + 15 = 93.90)[marion furniture reset] =
2554.54 - 32.77 [shoes reset] =
2521.77
the green is the actual electronics purchases, the blue is the bike stuff (which i may take out) and the red is the stuff that has been taken out. all of these things were purchase with money out of the $5000, but i've taken certain things out once i can find better ways to account for them than this.
if i include the bicycle stuff in the end, i'm halfway to spending this. i still need to get a replacement for the vlogging machine, as i've now given up on it; i'm going to be looking for a surplus hp laptop, so i can utilize the parts that i bought for it. but, under logic i've presented previously, i don't want to spend much for it - and am going to be using the chromebook for mobile applications.
the last piece of this is likely to be applied towards guitar processing power.
& this is my accounting for the court order, which i'm using to reset costs and fund expenses directly related to the move, including furniture for the unit.
court order:
1350 - 300 [moving] - 100 [london] - 271.06 [tuscarora reset - see above] =
678.94 - (91.26-2.23 + 49.58 = 138.61)[bedroom & bathroom stuff] [oct 9th] =
540.33 - 19.73 [outlet protectors] =
520.60 - 65.51 [tools & drawers] =
455.09 - 33.90 [drawers] - (79.42-2.71-50.83=25.88)[lightbulbs, towel rack] - 6.95 [bulbs] - 6.78 (kitchen stuff) =
381.58 - 93.90 [marion furniture reset - see above] =
287.68
what's left in this accounting space will likely be filled in my shelving for books and cds, finally. i haven't kept track of printing costs, but it's probably around $30.
this is all an accounting process, remember. what i'm doing is shifting things around from the $5000 to the court order; i had to refund myself, but i've also dipped back into it...
the 5000:
22.58 (bicycle) +
55.35 + ($10 (3 x 40 gb ide hard drives) + 164.40 (2 x 500 gb laptop sshds) + 103.67 (2 gb desktop internal drive) + 43.49 (50 bd-rs) + 27.69 (100 dvd-rs) + 4.22 (usb to ps/2 adapter) + 12.43 (mp3 sd card) + 122.80 (2 tb external hd) + 30.10 (cd-rs) + 47.91 (2x2gb laptop ram) = ) + 26.25 (laptop battery) + 65.85 (2 x 4 gb laptop ram) + 127.94 (rugged smart phone) = 786.75) = (8th/9th)
842.11 + (242.69 (chip) + 51.96 (case) + 361.59 (board) + 150.28 (ram) + 11.06 (thermal paste) + 134.45 (ssd) + 72.34 (psu) + 8.52 (power bar) = 1032.89) = (10th)
1875 + 53.30 (audiophile) -72.34 [cancelled psu] = (11th)
1855.96 + 79.09 [psu] + 10.20 (power bar) - 1.15 (tax error) +
2120.88 +
2238.52 + 20 (monitor) = (18th)
2258.52 + 116.89 (jewel cases) = (19th)
2375.41 +
2446.79 +
2473.07 + 6 (ups hold) = (24th)
2479.07 +
2535.57 +
2580.57 - 296.02 (hst/bathroom) =
2284.55 + 45.32 (bicycle for detroit) = (august 3rd)
2329.87 + 30.50 (lock) = (8th)
2360.37 + 32.74 (bike pump & failed tubes) (nov 9th) =
2393.11 +
2593.11 + 38.42 [bike tires, tubes] (nov 15th)=
2631.53 - 175 (deposit) (nov 29th)=
2456.53
2488.83
2502.05
2511.08
2653.49 +
2702.59 - [49.10 + 142.41 + 9.03 + 13.22 + 32.30 + 25 = 271.06] [total post-tuscarora reset from court case] =
2431.53 + 20.33 [batteries] [sept 11th] =
2451.86 + 4.51 [internet cable] [oct 12th] =
2456.37 + 158.18 [chrome book] [oct 14th] =
2614.55 + 33.89 [bike gloves] [oct 21st] =
2648.44 - (15 + 33.90 + 30 + 15 = 93.90)[marion furniture reset] =
2554.54 - 32.77 [shoes reset] =
2521.77
the green is the actual electronics purchases, the blue is the bike stuff (which i may take out) and the red is the stuff that has been taken out. all of these things were purchase with money out of the $5000, but i've taken certain things out once i can find better ways to account for them than this.
if i include the bicycle stuff in the end, i'm halfway to spending this. i still need to get a replacement for the vlogging machine, as i've now given up on it; i'm going to be looking for a surplus hp laptop, so i can utilize the parts that i bought for it. but, under logic i've presented previously, i don't want to spend much for it - and am going to be using the chromebook for mobile applications.
the last piece of this is likely to be applied towards guitar processing power.
& this is my accounting for the court order, which i'm using to reset costs and fund expenses directly related to the move, including furniture for the unit.
court order:
1350 - 300 [moving] - 100 [london] - 271.06 [tuscarora reset - see above] =
678.94 - (91.26-2.23 + 49.58 = 138.61)[bedroom & bathroom stuff] [oct 9th] =
540.33 - 19.73 [outlet protectors] =
520.60 - 65.51 [tools & drawers] =
455.09 - 33.90 [drawers] - (79.42-2.71-50.83=25.88)[lightbulbs, towel rack] - 6.95 [bulbs] - 6.78 (kitchen stuff) =
381.58 - 93.90 [marion furniture reset - see above] =
287.68
what's left in this accounting space will likely be filled in my shelving for books and cds, finally. i haven't kept track of printing costs, but it's probably around $30.
regarding the facial hair of my father in the 80s, i am going to point out that he was a lifelong zappa fan, and no doubt attempting to emulate the 'stache.
he got fairly close, sometimes.
zappa was famously of sicilian background, and himself often mistaken for arab. and, my father would have identified as italian before he identified as phoenician - probably as much due to the identification with frank as with identification with his mother's side.
"how do you identify, ethnically?"
"i'm going to have to go with frank zappa."
his mother, my grandmother, is actually phenotypically quite white; she comes off more as a white jew than an italian woman, and i do believe probably is, although the adoption makes things hard to guess at. my father's darker skin comes from his father, not his italian mother.
i'm a jazz fan myself, as well, as you should know. i've gone through phases where i've picked up old classic jazz records second hand. all kinds of stuff. as i was listening to some davis record or something, my father would sometimes come in and point out that "holy shit, i haven't heard that in years. your grandfather liked that record". that may seem like a weak ethnic marker; certainly, you don't have to be black to like jazz, or create it. but, his formative years were before the 60s. it's suggestive, anyways.
it's certainly possible - and i've pointed this out before - that the missing great-grandfather may have been mixed, himself. in addition to what looks like a jewish or mixed african male, there are rumours of native ancestry on that side, as well.
i don't want to pay for a dna test, but it's probably the only way to figure it out.
he got fairly close, sometimes.
zappa was famously of sicilian background, and himself often mistaken for arab. and, my father would have identified as italian before he identified as phoenician - probably as much due to the identification with frank as with identification with his mother's side.
"how do you identify, ethnically?"
"i'm going to have to go with frank zappa."
his mother, my grandmother, is actually phenotypically quite white; she comes off more as a white jew than an italian woman, and i do believe probably is, although the adoption makes things hard to guess at. my father's darker skin comes from his father, not his italian mother.
i'm a jazz fan myself, as well, as you should know. i've gone through phases where i've picked up old classic jazz records second hand. all kinds of stuff. as i was listening to some davis record or something, my father would sometimes come in and point out that "holy shit, i haven't heard that in years. your grandfather liked that record". that may seem like a weak ethnic marker; certainly, you don't have to be black to like jazz, or create it. but, his formative years were before the 60s. it's suggestive, anyways.
it's certainly possible - and i've pointed this out before - that the missing great-grandfather may have been mixed, himself. in addition to what looks like a jewish or mixed african male, there are rumours of native ancestry on that side, as well.
i don't want to pay for a dna test, but it's probably the only way to figure it out.
my father was the second in a family of six children; he had two younger brothers, two younger sisters and an older sister.
two of those sisters married africans, and i have black african cousins through one of them. the third did not. neither of his brothers had children.
my father married three different white women and had two children (that i am aware of) before he died of brain cancer before the age of 60. my sister does not tan as easily as i do.
two of those sisters married africans, and i have black african cousins through one of them. the third did not. neither of his brothers had children.
my father married three different white women and had two children (that i am aware of) before he died of brain cancer before the age of 60. my sister does not tan as easily as i do.
so, you've seen some shots of my father looking fairly ethnic, and some shots of his father looking even more ethnic. what did my grandfather's parents look like?
well, this is a picture of the woman that gave birth to the man in the previous picture. or, stated differently, it's a picture of my father with his grandmother. &, i am in fact the youngest person in the shot, too.
i don't know a thing about this woman at all - i had to rely on the identification on the back of the picture. no memory whatsoever. but, judging solely from this one picture, that would be the most archetypal quebecois woman that ever lived, and i am going to deduce that she therefore must have smoked in church. i suppose she would have been born some time around 1910 or so.
i believe this was taken in my mom & dad's house, as i recognize the furniture.
the oral history i've received is that the surname parent actually comes from a female ancestor, and it may very well be this one. but, if this is what my paternal grandfather's mother looked like, it suggests that she must have eloped with a fairly dark skinned man, of some kind of complex ancestry.
it brings up the more salient point - race is not fixed, but fluid. you expected a gradient, didn't you? but, the truth is more jumbled up. and, after going through a dark-skinned father and an even darker-skinned grandfather, i do happen to get back to a white great-grandmother, which also indicates how dark skinned the great-grandfather must have been....
well, this is a picture of the woman that gave birth to the man in the previous picture. or, stated differently, it's a picture of my father with his grandmother. &, i am in fact the youngest person in the shot, too.
i don't know a thing about this woman at all - i had to rely on the identification on the back of the picture. no memory whatsoever. but, judging solely from this one picture, that would be the most archetypal quebecois woman that ever lived, and i am going to deduce that she therefore must have smoked in church. i suppose she would have been born some time around 1910 or so.
i believe this was taken in my mom & dad's house, as i recognize the furniture.
the oral history i've received is that the surname parent actually comes from a female ancestor, and it may very well be this one. but, if this is what my paternal grandfather's mother looked like, it suggests that she must have eloped with a fairly dark skinned man, of some kind of complex ancestry.
it brings up the more salient point - race is not fixed, but fluid. you expected a gradient, didn't you? but, the truth is more jumbled up. and, after going through a dark-skinned father and an even darker-skinned grandfather, i do happen to get back to a white great-grandmother, which also indicates how dark skinned the great-grandfather must have been....
i bumped into this a few weeks ago and meant to post when i got online.
i posted some pictures of my father a few weeks before that, looking very much like a visible minority. this is a picture of his father, trying to figure out what the fuck he's doing with a white kid on his lap. january, 1983 - probably some time around my second birthday.
that man was not italian; he married a woman who was adopted, and raised as a zito. the italian in me is on his wife's side. according to what i know about him, he identified as a french canadian and was raised as a quebecois catholic. his name was william robert parent, which i know because it is a reversal of my father's given names, although i think i remember hearing about a joseph in there, as well. i was given my father's name as a middle name.
he would have been born in the mid to late 30s. i remember his funeral; he died in the late 80s or early 90s of a massive heart attack brought on by poor lifestyle decisions, before his 60th birthday. those poor lifestyle decisions - drinking, smoking, over-eating and also gambling - are the sum total of what i know about him.
he worked as a bricklayer; he was a mason.
besides having some clear french canadian features, and the next post will discuss this, he's actually rather ambiguous in phenotypic expression. it is possible that he may simply have had old european ancestry from the south of france, although my research into my surname has suggested an origin in the historically celtic (belgian) areas around paris, so this is not entirely consistent with an absolute solution to his ethnicity. one may rather suspect that he may have been roma, that is gypsy - or perhaps of middle eastern extraction. some sort of jewish is one possibility, but do recall that much of the middle east was colonized by the french in the period between napoleon and the first world war. my immediate assumption would be either lebanese or jewish, that is some sort of carthaginian, however far removed from the area. it is in fact very difficult to determine a lebanese person from a jewish person on first glance. but, note the lamp behind him, which is somewhat cut off in this 2013 scan, but quite oriental in the original.
i would carefully point out the wooly hair, which is a trait carried almost exclusively by africans, as well as some semites. i am left no more certain about the situation. is he jewish or african?
as it is, i also have a picture of myself with his mother, that is my great-grandmother.
i posted some pictures of my father a few weeks before that, looking very much like a visible minority. this is a picture of his father, trying to figure out what the fuck he's doing with a white kid on his lap. january, 1983 - probably some time around my second birthday.
that man was not italian; he married a woman who was adopted, and raised as a zito. the italian in me is on his wife's side. according to what i know about him, he identified as a french canadian and was raised as a quebecois catholic. his name was william robert parent, which i know because it is a reversal of my father's given names, although i think i remember hearing about a joseph in there, as well. i was given my father's name as a middle name.
he would have been born in the mid to late 30s. i remember his funeral; he died in the late 80s or early 90s of a massive heart attack brought on by poor lifestyle decisions, before his 60th birthday. those poor lifestyle decisions - drinking, smoking, over-eating and also gambling - are the sum total of what i know about him.
he worked as a bricklayer; he was a mason.
besides having some clear french canadian features, and the next post will discuss this, he's actually rather ambiguous in phenotypic expression. it is possible that he may simply have had old european ancestry from the south of france, although my research into my surname has suggested an origin in the historically celtic (belgian) areas around paris, so this is not entirely consistent with an absolute solution to his ethnicity. one may rather suspect that he may have been roma, that is gypsy - or perhaps of middle eastern extraction. some sort of jewish is one possibility, but do recall that much of the middle east was colonized by the french in the period between napoleon and the first world war. my immediate assumption would be either lebanese or jewish, that is some sort of carthaginian, however far removed from the area. it is in fact very difficult to determine a lebanese person from a jewish person on first glance. but, note the lamp behind him, which is somewhat cut off in this 2013 scan, but quite oriental in the original.
i would carefully point out the wooly hair, which is a trait carried almost exclusively by africans, as well as some semites. i am left no more certain about the situation. is he jewish or african?
as it is, i also have a picture of myself with his mother, that is my great-grandmother.
Monday, October 29, 2018
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/
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/
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.
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
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.
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.
& 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
- 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.
Sunday, October 28, 2018
is it possible that i'm the subject of some kind of nazi experiment or something?
well, it seems like incomprehensibly bad luck, doesn't it?
i need to say the same thing i've said repeatedly: i don't want to sit in my apartment by myself and do drugs. that's not going to make me "happier", and that's not going to increase my productivity. it's certainly not going to make me want to participate more in society. it's just going to force me to spend large amounts of time trying to sleep the drugs off before i can back to what i'm doing in a clearer state of mind.
i don't need drugs, i need a stable environment that will allow me to get back to my work in a sober and clear-headed state.
well, it seems like incomprehensibly bad luck, doesn't it?
i need to say the same thing i've said repeatedly: i don't want to sit in my apartment by myself and do drugs. that's not going to make me "happier", and that's not going to increase my productivity. it's certainly not going to make me want to participate more in society. it's just going to force me to spend large amounts of time trying to sleep the drugs off before i can back to what i'm doing in a clearer state of mind.
i don't need drugs, i need a stable environment that will allow me to get back to my work in a sober and clear-headed state.
so, i had some kind of event down here this morning. i guess there's two possibilities and they reduce to the same thing: either i was affected by the bleach i used when i put the machine through a clean cycle (i'm done laundry. finally.) or this kind of dusty, chemically smell that gets worst in the early morning had some kind of effect on me.
i felt fucked up on something, and i really didn't enjoy it.
the consequence is that i had to sleep off what i wanted to be a productive day, and i was hoping that i was at the end of that.
i don't know what the smell is; i don't recognize it. i think it might be coming from inside the walls in the unit, but the fact that it comes up and down suggests it has a local source. if it was remnant smoke on my furniture it would be constant. and, if it was coming from next door, you'd think it would be worse during peak hours, rather than early in the morning. so, i'm left to conclude that the kid upstairs is smoking late at night. up until last night, it seemed like she was mostly smoking cigarettes, and maybe some pot, but last night was a rough experience.
generally, it gives me a sore throat and makes me cough. last night, i had a kind of racing high that i'd associate with a stimulant - and then i crashed very hard, which is what happens.
i moved here explicitly to get away from this.
again: i don't have much direct evidence, so i don't want to jump to conclusions. there could be some factors outside that make the pollution worse at a specific time of day, or it could be a consequence of a dirty heating system that switches on at the same time or something. i'm still in fact-finding mode. i'm still trying to figure it out.
but, i don't want what happened last night to ever happen again.
and, i'm dreading going through this again, after i tried so hard to make sure i wouldn't...
i'm going to have to do what i'm going to have to do, but let's hope i don't have to do it.
i think the dad should be home upstairs soon, and we'll see what he says when he comes in. i'm kind of hoping he comes down here and questions me, as that's probably the best way to approach it.
i'm still groggy, but hopefully it wears off soon.
i felt fucked up on something, and i really didn't enjoy it.
the consequence is that i had to sleep off what i wanted to be a productive day, and i was hoping that i was at the end of that.
i don't know what the smell is; i don't recognize it. i think it might be coming from inside the walls in the unit, but the fact that it comes up and down suggests it has a local source. if it was remnant smoke on my furniture it would be constant. and, if it was coming from next door, you'd think it would be worse during peak hours, rather than early in the morning. so, i'm left to conclude that the kid upstairs is smoking late at night. up until last night, it seemed like she was mostly smoking cigarettes, and maybe some pot, but last night was a rough experience.
generally, it gives me a sore throat and makes me cough. last night, i had a kind of racing high that i'd associate with a stimulant - and then i crashed very hard, which is what happens.
i moved here explicitly to get away from this.
again: i don't have much direct evidence, so i don't want to jump to conclusions. there could be some factors outside that make the pollution worse at a specific time of day, or it could be a consequence of a dirty heating system that switches on at the same time or something. i'm still in fact-finding mode. i'm still trying to figure it out.
but, i don't want what happened last night to ever happen again.
and, i'm dreading going through this again, after i tried so hard to make sure i wouldn't...
i'm going to have to do what i'm going to have to do, but let's hope i don't have to do it.
i think the dad should be home upstairs soon, and we'll see what he says when he comes in. i'm kind of hoping he comes down here and questions me, as that's probably the best way to approach it.
i'm still groggy, but hopefully it wears off soon.
i've pointed this out a few times, now.
it is true that if any specific country in the western alliance were to stop arms shipments to the saudis, then another would pick it up. but, that is what every country in the western alliance says.
we claim there's no point in pulling out, because the americans would get the contracts. and, the americans claim the germans would get the contract. and, the germans claim the french would get the contract. .... . & this is all true enough.
but, if we're all saying the same thing to each other, maybe there's actually enough of a confluence of opinion here that a boycott should be being discussed.
i think that the evidence is fairly clear: arming the saudis right now is something roughly equivalent to arming hitler in the 30s, which is something that the west did, too - at tremendous consequence to itself.
a total arms boycott on the saudis is something that nato should be seriously considering.
so, they'll buy from the russians, then?
well, let them make that choice, if they so choose - i might suggest it would not be in their interests.
it is true that if any specific country in the western alliance were to stop arms shipments to the saudis, then another would pick it up. but, that is what every country in the western alliance says.
we claim there's no point in pulling out, because the americans would get the contracts. and, the americans claim the germans would get the contract. and, the germans claim the french would get the contract. .... . & this is all true enough.
but, if we're all saying the same thing to each other, maybe there's actually enough of a confluence of opinion here that a boycott should be being discussed.
i think that the evidence is fairly clear: arming the saudis right now is something roughly equivalent to arming hitler in the 30s, which is something that the west did, too - at tremendous consequence to itself.
a total arms boycott on the saudis is something that nato should be seriously considering.
so, they'll buy from the russians, then?
well, let them make that choice, if they so choose - i might suggest it would not be in their interests.
yeah. i'm going to file a s. 2 as well.
this is kind of awkward, but i think it's necessary due to the initial definition of "harassment" that was provided to me by the cop. the truth is that, in canada, which has a single federal criminal code and no provincial codes, harassment has a stronger wording and burden than many jurisdictions in the united states - in canada you have to explicitly show a genuine basis of fear. it is not enough to simply be annoyed, or simply be offended, there is a burden on the crown to show the potential for concrete harm. and, it is for that reason that i've demonstrated such a high degree of confidence - i know that these charges are premised upon an error of law, and i'm consequently the one dealing with actual harassment, here.
however, in the united states, harassment laws that explicitly included the term "annoy" have been struck down as unconstitutional, under a 2011 ruling.
so, i'm in a weird situation where i'm fighting against an error in law that is rooted in an american understanding of "harassment" that has been ruled unconstitutional in america, and never existed in canada in the first place - but that one would expect would be struck down as unconstitutional here, too, if such a law did exist. so, if i was arrested for being annoying under what is an american statute that has already been struck down, i should be challenging the arrest on the basis it exists on - even if it is in truth extralegal, in addition to the arrest being extrajudicial.
what that means is that i'd be seeking a judicial ruling that explicitly states that behaviour that is annoying but not threatening is not covered under harassment laws, which is perhaps what the society needs in order to work through the colloquialism.
again: this is why the cops are supposed to ask a judge for a warrant.
so, that's s. 2 & s. 7. i'll have to think about anything else i'm going to bring up...
this is kind of awkward, but i think it's necessary due to the initial definition of "harassment" that was provided to me by the cop. the truth is that, in canada, which has a single federal criminal code and no provincial codes, harassment has a stronger wording and burden than many jurisdictions in the united states - in canada you have to explicitly show a genuine basis of fear. it is not enough to simply be annoyed, or simply be offended, there is a burden on the crown to show the potential for concrete harm. and, it is for that reason that i've demonstrated such a high degree of confidence - i know that these charges are premised upon an error of law, and i'm consequently the one dealing with actual harassment, here.
however, in the united states, harassment laws that explicitly included the term "annoy" have been struck down as unconstitutional, under a 2011 ruling.
so, i'm in a weird situation where i'm fighting against an error in law that is rooted in an american understanding of "harassment" that has been ruled unconstitutional in america, and never existed in canada in the first place - but that one would expect would be struck down as unconstitutional here, too, if such a law did exist. so, if i was arrested for being annoying under what is an american statute that has already been struck down, i should be challenging the arrest on the basis it exists on - even if it is in truth extralegal, in addition to the arrest being extrajudicial.
what that means is that i'd be seeking a judicial ruling that explicitly states that behaviour that is annoying but not threatening is not covered under harassment laws, which is perhaps what the society needs in order to work through the colloquialism.
again: this is why the cops are supposed to ask a judge for a warrant.
so, that's s. 2 & s. 7. i'll have to think about anything else i'm going to bring up...
and, how will a carbon tax affect me directly?
the truth is that i'm very conscious of this, and have a very low footprint. i don't buy gas in any way. my one sin is that i buy a lot of imported fruit, but my argument is that it isn't really a choice i'm making, it's a choice made by distributors - largely driven by the price of labour. i live in one of the largest tomato-producing regions in the world, but the grocery store stocks tomatoes from mexico, because it saves money by doing it - and i need to go through the distributors, whether i like it or not.
if a carbon tax increases the price of mexican tomatoes, that may make canadian tomatoes more competitive, which is both good for the environment and the economy.
but, it exposes another problem: is a carbon tax legal under the new nafta? was it legal under the old one? in their backwards attempt to stop this, the conservatives are going to focus on constitutional arguments that are largely invalid. the more pressing challenge may come in the form of arguing that it's essentially a tariff on imported goods, and it's damage on foreign investors consequently rules it invalid under wto or other "free trade" rules.
we went through this about ten years ago, when the province tried to set up a rebate system for locally built sustainable energy projects like wind farms, and it got shut down by some japanese investors through a wto challenge. i wouldn't be surprised to see the mexicans sue us over this, if it hurts their manufacturing and agriculture sectors.
the other thing i need to buy is electronics, but i try to buy them a little older or second hand, so i'm getting surplus stock or pre-used goods. i do the same thing with clothes - with the exception of certain things like socks, i insist on buying all clothes second-hand, to avoid paying into the clothing economy, which is largely driven by slave labour. i can't imagine a new economy, but i can try to avoid supporting the existing one. as i focus on surplus supply, this isn't likely to affect my costs on electronics very much.
so, in terms of concrete changes in my life, this is likely to affect me only in the sense of it increasing the price of produce. but, if that leads to the distributors shifting to more locally grown items, it's a long overdue change that i'm strongly in favour of.
the truth is that i'm very conscious of this, and have a very low footprint. i don't buy gas in any way. my one sin is that i buy a lot of imported fruit, but my argument is that it isn't really a choice i'm making, it's a choice made by distributors - largely driven by the price of labour. i live in one of the largest tomato-producing regions in the world, but the grocery store stocks tomatoes from mexico, because it saves money by doing it - and i need to go through the distributors, whether i like it or not.
if a carbon tax increases the price of mexican tomatoes, that may make canadian tomatoes more competitive, which is both good for the environment and the economy.
but, it exposes another problem: is a carbon tax legal under the new nafta? was it legal under the old one? in their backwards attempt to stop this, the conservatives are going to focus on constitutional arguments that are largely invalid. the more pressing challenge may come in the form of arguing that it's essentially a tariff on imported goods, and it's damage on foreign investors consequently rules it invalid under wto or other "free trade" rules.
we went through this about ten years ago, when the province tried to set up a rebate system for locally built sustainable energy projects like wind farms, and it got shut down by some japanese investors through a wto challenge. i wouldn't be surprised to see the mexicans sue us over this, if it hurts their manufacturing and agriculture sectors.
the other thing i need to buy is electronics, but i try to buy them a little older or second hand, so i'm getting surplus stock or pre-used goods. i do the same thing with clothes - with the exception of certain things like socks, i insist on buying all clothes second-hand, to avoid paying into the clothing economy, which is largely driven by slave labour. i can't imagine a new economy, but i can try to avoid supporting the existing one. as i focus on surplus supply, this isn't likely to affect my costs on electronics very much.
so, in terms of concrete changes in my life, this is likely to affect me only in the sense of it increasing the price of produce. but, if that leads to the distributors shifting to more locally grown items, it's a long overdue change that i'm strongly in favour of.
just in case you're curious, windsor would be the fourth largest metropolitan area in ontario, behind the gta (including kitchener & hamilton), ottawa and london. but, considering that windsor is really a part of the detroit metropolitan area, the region actually rivals toronto in size. i do think that the gta is a bit bigger than the greater detroit area, at this point, but that wasn't always true.
what's left of windsor seems to see itself as a small and somewhat isolated town, but this is a relic of industrial decay, and the apparent fact that this city is ignorant of it's own history and geography. the reality is that this is historically the southern part of what has been the largest and most important city in the great lakes region.
the geography makes it hard to imagine a different outcome, but had the initial french colonists of fort detroit expanded the city southwards into ontario rather than northwards into michigan then this may have become the biggest and most important city in canada.
what's left of windsor seems to see itself as a small and somewhat isolated town, but this is a relic of industrial decay, and the apparent fact that this city is ignorant of it's own history and geography. the reality is that this is historically the southern part of what has been the largest and most important city in the great lakes region.
the geography makes it hard to imagine a different outcome, but had the initial french colonists of fort detroit expanded the city southwards into ontario rather than northwards into michigan then this may have become the biggest and most important city in canada.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)