Monday, April 28

[gottawonder]

Today I am grateful for:

Good sleep.

A warm, sunny day for most of the day today.

A conversation with Trainwreck that wasn't too bad, though once again she was going to talk about what she wanted about and not ask me what I'm doing. I asserted myself, and talked about the freestyle with River that I've been working on, and she was like "I didn't know you were doing that". No, you likely didn't, because you either don't ask me what I'm doing, or you don't listen.

I did chores and such, then cleaned up and headed to pottery.

I went to the nearby town first to vote, which I did. Yay!

I went to the local gas station to get gas, and I chatted with the owner. The owner is a very friendly guy who ALWAYS talks about politics. Very aggressively, and seems to care a LOT about things. I asked him if he was voting today, and he said no.

I actually gave him a bit of shit for that, because this guy is SO VOCAL about politics, and freedom, and so on. He hates the current U.S. president, and all he talks about is HOW could a guy like that get into office? Well, guys like that get into office because the people who hate him didn't ALL go vote.

The gas station owner does have to work until 6 pm, but the polls were open until 7:30 everywhere. He also could have voted by mail with a special ballot.

No more bitching to me about the state of things, if you don't vote!

I went to pottery, and briefly saw a few people. I worked on glazing some things that are back from the bisque firing. I felt like the glaze wasn't cooperating at all, and I hope those pieces turn out okay. It felt like a struggle.

Then I went to Winner's. A few weeks ago I found cute sequined capelets, and today I found a very similar item only with sleeves. Very cute.

Then I got groceries. Not a huge haul, but I still feel shocked at what a moderate shopping trip comes to now.

As always, I am grateful to be able to get groceries, in terms of financial means, physical ability, having a car, and even having a decent grocery store well-stocked with inventory.

I am grateful that the Liberals won, mainly from my concerns about the Conservatives having too many ties with the U.S. right now. I do hope that Carney is able to do a better job managing the finances, though.

Comments

[ratunderpaper]

In a perfect world, a coalition government (Conservatives + Liberals) would make sure each party behaved decently and carefully. But a Liberal minority is the next best thing. I could not stop thinking about that photo of PP glad-handing the so called Freedom Warriors.

PP said nothing about the "51st state" hooey. A single statement, like "I, like all patriotic Canadians, am shocked and offended - if it's a joke, it's an unfunny and bad one," would have made some difference. But his silence was read as complicity, and it made him even more unlikeable.

[gottawonder]

I think that a coalition government is good too, only maybe includes all the parties, and not just the two most divided ones.

After all, it was the NDP that got things like dental care and a few important social subsidies.

I also think the Green party needs to have a role in how we make our choices, though not sure they need to be the dominating party.

All I know, is that I haven't agreed with much of anything the Conservatives have done here in Alberta since we've been here, and I sure as heck do NOT want to be buddy buddy with the monster in the U.S.

[ratunderpaper]

I have read some party policies carefully and though I think the idea of co-op living is nice when it works, a non-profit housing system is not going to be successful in practice. (That's one of the things that our NDP favours.)

Many people chose the anti-Trump candidate when voting; it's a big enough issue now that T has introduced ominous phrasing to the threats that no longer seem like bluster.

[gottawonder]

Why doesn't non-profit housing work? Are people not sheltered?

I have had a reasonable amount of experience with Low Income housing in Manitoba, and it indeed acts as decent housing for people with very low or no incomes. It's not luxurious, but there's pretty much no other way that a single mom with two or three kids is going to get a place that actually gives them separate bedrooms.

If you mean "they will keep costing money to operate", then yes. That's kind of how it works. In the meantime, families can live indoors.

[ratunderpaper]

Our NDP wants ONLY non-profit housing for the province, sort of one step closer to communism.

Decent low-income housing should work, but often attracts drug users and violent renters - then it's no longer decent, is it? Single parents get the short end of the stick, unfortunately.

Co-ops are great if people put the effort into maintaining them.

[gottawonder]

I know that to some degree what you are saying is true, that low income housing often provides housing to people with serious issues.

Yet, there's always that catch. Low income housing, properly managed, provides housing to families and people living on disability and retired folk who rely on government pension.

I don't know how you go about only helping people that seem deserving, or how you'd go about deciding that.

My understanding of the NDP's plan, and I agree with it wholeheartedly, is to do away with corporate rental companies. The huge ones that buy up all the available properties, ones that should have been available to people wanting to buy a single family dwelling, and they drive the prices out of reach of individuals.

This would still absolutely allow for an individual to own one or two rental properties, or to rent out a suite in their own home.

What's happened here in Edmonton, is that a home is now almost impossible for a young person to buy, meaning pretty much never being able to build equity. All the houses that go onto the market are being bought by rental companies, many who are not even based in Canada.

Jagmeet's plan was to make sure that only certain groups would be allowed to buy houses/property intended for rental: "The plan is similar to a bill the NDP proposed last year that would have restricted such sales to individuals, non-profits, municipalities, agencies and co-ops."

https://www.ctvnews.ca/federal-election-2025/article/ndp-housing-promise-includes-new-landlord-limits-more-help-for-non-profits/

What he proposes is not communism at all, since communism is against ownership of private property. It is more like Democratic Socialism, which supports a range of privately owned and publicly owned resources.

Basically, it's against pure capitalism, in favor of protecting those that don't have a lot of money and won't win the capitalism game.

[ratunderpaper]

Socialism and Communism intersect on some social issues, and excepting universal healthcare and income-slanted taxation, I'm not really socialist.

Income-based taxation could be better fixed to close the loopholes used by the super-wealthy. But, I'm not the one to bell that cat.

I once had an accountant who suggested all manner of schemes to avoid higher-bracket taxation, most of which seemed tiresome and barely legal. I incorporated instead.

I know a couple of Libertarians who believe they are very clever, but their ideals are different from the reality of society. One artist chap (I do not know him personally) calls himself Libertarian because he doesn't like the stigma (or the illegality, I guess) of solicitation. Har!

[gottawonder]

Communism: the state owns and controls everything. No private ownership. No religion.

Socialism: the people own and control everything. Things like industry and natural resources (forest products, oil and gas, mines, fisheries) are collectively owned and money shared, you can still own private property and business. Freedom of religion.

Imagine if Canadians actually all owned and managed their natural resources like a co-op and distributed the money, instead of it going to corporations.

OF COURSE we should be taxing higher income people and businesses at a higher rate, but if the government doesn't spend that money on social services for lower income people, how does it benefit them?

As things stand, whenever the Conservative government gets a chance, it cuts all kinds of social benefits, and that doesn't seem to result in lower taxes for the average person.

Libertarian doesn't even sound like having a government at all. Best of luck to everyone, we're taking the taxes to do...nothing at all for anyone!

People who want to remove the stigma from sex work need to take a long, hard look at their choices. If no one wants to have sex with them without being paid first, they are likely first class garbage.

[ratunderpaper]

I understand the differentiations already, but thank you for your opinions on each!

The last comment made me sputter cranberry juice out of my nose.