Read that again. “Paying employees is the top risk to the economy.”
That shouldn’t really be surprising to anyone though. Employees are a huge expense.
If my rent goes up, or the cost of groceries keeps going up, that’s a huge risk to my financials as well. Yet no one expects me to just roll over and take it, I’ll look for a new place with lower rent, even it if means downsizing, and I’ll look for lower priced food items or even cut specific foods from my shopping list. And this is while I keep on spending my disposable income/entertainment budget, and putting money into my RRSP/TFSA, and keeping money in a savings account in case of an emergency. Just because I have reserves doesn’t mean I want to pay more for rent or food.
Companies are no different. Can you explain to me how it makes good financial sense when I do it, but when a company does it people freak out (even though they have no valid alternatives)?
I’m sure they do, they may not understand the technical details, but I’m not sure why you think people who make rules or pass laws would think the rules or laws won’t be broken or circumvented. It’s a law, not some magical contract. If your parents say “no Xbox until you’ve finished your homework”, they’re not amazed when they find you on the Xbox 20 minutes later, homework unfinished.
It’s been illegal to sell alcohol and porn to minors for decades now, do you think before the internet and VHS it was impossible for kids to find? Do you think the lawmakers back then were somehow baffled that the law they put in place, didn’t 100% prevent children from drinking and stiffening their socks?
the Government of Canada should consider introducing a windfall profits tax on large, price-setting corporations to disincentivize excess hikes in their profit margins for these items
Right, but it’s broader than just targeting 3 large grocery chains. AFAIK there’s no current law that allows the Government to tax an individual at a rate that isn’t on the books, and something like this is still years away (it’s just a recommendation after a year of study for starters).
It doesn’t help anyone struggling to put food on the table in the short term sadly, but hey let’s all just blast off into stupid land and suggest taxing them is the easy answer that will solve all of our problems. This isn’t Facebook, and the original poster’s suggestion was fucking retarded.
And we see what happens with every other law that tries something similar. The law spends months or years in deliberation, and eventually when it passes it’s not clear enough of what a ‘grocer’ is, or whether individually owned franchises count, etc.
That’s why none of this shit ever amounts to anything but noise.
Of course, and what’s the culture tied to English speakers then? Do you think 2nd and 4rd generation Canadian Italians/Ukranians/wherever, who don’t speak their native language, have lost all sense of their culture? Are the 2nd and 3rd generation anglophones living in Quebec incapable of adopting any of Quebecs culture?
Get over yourself.
The problem seems to be that Quebec has intertwined language with culture. A language is simply a means for two people to communicate ideas, and that is paramount to a functioning society.
Without a common method to exchange ideas, you can’t have a society. English isn’t the best language, but it works, and like it or not, it’s been globally adopted. It’s a standard, and anyone in the tech industry knows the problems that come with having multiple, competing, interoperable standards.
especially with short notice of an upcoming cold snap
I’ve unfortunately lived in 'berta for the past 3 years. Every winter there’s been a week in January where it’s been below -30. Two winters ago my furnace was screaming trying to keep up. The last thing this cold snap should be is a surprise to anyone who lives here.
Well, they really don’t like it when you call them a cunt here.