Just For Laughs gags meets traffic engineering.

Raised crosswalks weren’t too common in most burroughs of Montréal when I left, but alternative road surfaces for slower zones we’re gaining popularity.

It’s pretty easy to tell where they are. They’re at intersections.

Montréal never banned right on red.

No right on red was the default, then most of Canada enabled right on red in the 1970, but Québec did not. Québec later enabled right on red by default in 2003, but Montréal (island) retained no right on red.

And RToR is bad everywhere. We’veknow it for a long time, but have jsut collectivelydecoded the cost was worth it. Here’s an article from Victoira in 1981 talking about it https://www.newspapers.com/clip/107821508/times-colonist-victoria-may-5-1981/

Just make a new PAL class that let’s you keep this list of weapons. But also requires you to be on the supplementary reserve list.

Supplementary reserve numbers and the gun buyback issues resolved in a single pen stroke.

Removing the 57% of transportation emissions from individualized transit is more important than the <2% from public transit.

Not that we can’t do both, just where priorities and performance measures should lie.

I would personally argue changing modes of transit are very much a local leader problem. Since they decide land use policies, transportation priorities, and many other things that can improve or degrade the transportation options available to people.

I’m obviously biased with my own political reality, but a city council can do more for modal share than a federal decree. And it’s obviously not a zero sum game. We can replace fleets woth electric busses AND build bike lanes.

I’m not saying electrifying busses isn’t good. It definitely is. Especially for local air quality. But as a priority, it’s pretty low down.

Yes. But even better for the kids would be to not breath the fumes from the 20% emissions coming from passenger vehicles and the 37% from non-passenger work vehicle family passenger vehicles (credit to Rollie Williams for that term)

I think we’re saying the same thing with a different strategy.

Such to say, I’d prioritize eliminating all the non-passenger work vehicle passenger family vehicles than reduce bus fuel emissions. That might mean pumping out more “dirty” busses for an overall net positive in the short term.

With transportation accounting for roughly 28 percent of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions, transit agencies…

28% of emissions are in the transportation sector, but busses are part of the 2% of the transportation sector that doesn’t get it’s own category. Or <0.5% overall.

emissions in 2022 were light-duty trucks, which include sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and minivans (37%); medium- and heavy-duty trucks (23%); passenger cars (20%); commercial aircraft (7%); other aircraft (2%); pipelines (4%); ships and boats (3%); and rail (2%).

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/transportation-sector-emissions

I’m not saying electrifying busses isn’t good. It definitely is. Especially for local air quality. But as a priority, it’s pretty low down.

Yeah, i really like the data, I just wish I could manually adjust scoring.

I have the same issue with t.io weather.

Pretty big ROI for the people actually.

1. Proxy war is better than a war on our own soil. While the straight conflict is one part; Russia is also fantastic at information operations, and those are greatly subdued here due to that federations current conflict.

2. All the donated vehicles are Canadian produced, so we get a subsidy for the vehicle industry (might of heard some issues around that regarding a trade war) and defense industry (a good strategic asset to have).

3. The Operation Unifier mission training Ukrainian soldiers also allows our soldiers to learn from Ukrainians, keeping them up to date on the latest tactics of the war.

4. With the current rumblings from another one of our neighbours, Canada has a pretty fucking huge interest in supporting a rule of law, over might makes right, international order.

I’ve never seen a power shrug done without a hold before. What does this target?

I’m obviously not suggesting that the transfer system would change in the duration of William Hume’s suffering.

My point is that his suffering could be a symptom of a transfer system issue the requires resolution. By resolving THAT probable issue; we can both ensure Hume’s suffering is not in vien AND reduce future unnecessary suffering, long term effects, and/or death.

To be clear, I am fully supportive of MAID and have a living will of MAID criteria to make decisions easier on my family. My grandfather-in-law didn’t take the MAID route in September, simply because ceasing medication was a quicker option.

I’m also supportive of facilities not providing MAID, but not for uniquely religious reasons. I’m also not opposed to the Québec legislation that requires all palliative facilities to provide it. It can even make it easier for facilities to not provide MAID by just also not providing palliative (though that comes with a transfer requirement for all palliative patients…)

Yeah, in my diagonal read, I don’t think I captured that the facility was refusing MAID solely on religious grounds. That’s not kosher.

I don’t personally think any facility should be forced to provide MAID. Much as no individual staff should be requiredto. Rather the transfer protocols are what could use an update or spotlight.

Why must the patient be transfered with no family; particularly when it was not a time sensitive transfer? Why is the transfer vehcile unable to keep the patient alive for the journey; in this case it was an elective procedure, but that same failing would exist for a non-elective procude the hospital may be unable to treat?

I’m not a medical person, but my systems viewpoint is wondering what patient transfer is so precarious.

Let’s take the average cost of school and residence in Ontario: $86k for a four year undergraduate.

Let’s go with 8 months of part time work (8hr weeks), and 4 moths of summer work (40 hr/weeks).

That gives us 8 months x 4 weeks x 8 hours x 4 years: 1,024 hours part time. 4 months x 40 hours x 3 years: 480 hours summer work.

Total hours: 1,504.

Ontario minimum wage is $17.60, so that’s $26,470 over the course of studies.

The average cost of an undergraduate degree is $86k, over three times that. In order to make that same 1504 hours be sufficient, you’d need an salary closer to $57/hour.

Let’s look at it another way, let’s take that $86,000 and see how many hours you’d need at a generous $30/hr: 2,850 hours.

Let’s max out the summers at 70 hours, a very loaded schedule: that takes care of 840 hours. So you’d still need 2,010 over the 8 semesters. Or 16 hours a week. Fucking ridiculous workload, even at nearly double minimum wage.

I have a core memory from a a course I was doing as COVID lockdowns were kicking off.

Student: “How will I know my employees are working from home?”

Prof: “How do you know they’re working from the office?”

Oh, I’m on board with the concept. Just trying to correct a bit of accidental misinformation on Sweden having no upper limit to day-fines.

I’m pretty sure our military justice system uses a a form of day-fines. So we even have an existing precedent at home!

Swedish day fines have, contrary to its Finnish counterparts, a maximum limit so as not to render too excessive of a fine should the offender have a very large income.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-fine

I think there is a balance here. There is risk, so a discussion is required. But, the risk is medium, so a pharmacist can walk you through options.