An interesting contrast here. Air Canada is forced to honour an erroneous committment made by its service department. Government of Canada is not forced to honour a committment made by its service department.
I could understand it if the error was discovered and acted upon in a reasonable time, but over 30 years? That's just not acceptable.
Counterpoint: a very large fraction of the population is one unexpected bill away from insolvency. It doesn't seem unreasonable to impose a similar fear on corporations for actual criminal activity.
Yes, that's me saying that a corporation breaking the law should have to legitimately consider closing it's doors. In some cases, forced closure should be part of the actual penalty.
I don't think it's fair to lay current economic landscape squarely at Trudeau's feet.
I agree. There is plenty of blame to go around. Trudeau, the other leaders, the MPs, and the very parties themselves going back to at least 1990 are to blame.
There is virtually nothing that can't be traced back to changes in policy enacted by, supported by, and tacitly accepted by literally everyone involved.
Changes to EI that gutted the power of non-union employees.
Changes to business and labour policies such that "society owes me a business" and "nobody owes you a job" attitudes were fostered, then cemented.
Any subsidy or tax reduction or public funding of anything that generates private profit.
Complete dismantling of a world-leading social housing program.
Gutting civil service in favour of consultants and industry association advisors.
Allowing already weak anti-monopoly legislation to gather dust in a drawer.
The focus on the financial health of the stock market instead of the financial health and stability of the general public.
The idea that industry can self-regulate potentially damaging behaviours. It's never happened. It never will.
And my favourite, running the country like a business. Every employer runs their business as a dictator. Who the hell thinks that's the right model for running a country?
Saskatchewan, Canada. To the best of my knowledge, all villages and even some hamlets have mayors and councils. Many hamlets, and possibly some villages, choose to operate as "unincorporated", essentially putting them under the control of the surrounding "rural municipality" (approximately equivalent to a county).
Rural municipalities have their own councils and Reeves (approximate equivalent of mayor).
The province has the authority to impose an adminstration in the event of malfeasance or lack of candidates.
I think that things are similar across Canada, but I don't know for sure. This may be a historical artifact of pre-Confederation settlement or the exceptionally low population density in Saskatchewan.
There are people who, whatever they might gain, pursue political power to serve the best interests of society. I think of people like Charlie Angus in Canada or the former mayor of the village I once worked for.
I have always been suspicious of any "rights" movement among those with power. Whether it's "White rights," the "rights" of corporations, the rights of the property class and wealthy, or Men's Rights. It is not that such rights do not exist or that there are no grievances deserving of redress, it's that they too often are self-serving attempts to retain or increase power.
I am of the opinion that the vast majority of legitimate male grievance against society would be better addressed by bringing to heel the corporations, the wealthy, and those who seek political power for personal gain.
And here's me over in the corner thinking that maybe those with a monopoly on state-sanctioned violence should be held to a higher standard than the general public, not a lower one.
If that had been a gang of thugs (🤔), you can bet that everything would be done to pursue the case. And not just two people, but the whole gang as participants in a criminal activity.
And this isn't even lemmy.world, it's lemmy.ca.
So (drum roll) it's even weirder than you thought! 🤣
I've read a number of articles claiming to demonstrate how many of the negative things our governments and corporations foist upon us were first used in prisons. They were then rolled out to the general public, starting with disadvantaged and marginalized communities.
It's time for organizations like the John Howard Society to get more support so that they can be more vocal and more active.
It was never sustainable right from the beginning. Food banks are supported and funded mostly by those just a paycheque or two from being a client themselves. If the actually well-off were doing their part, food banks would mostly disappear because wages and social assistance would be up to the task of making sure people can afford to eat.
There is a really easy fix for that. A proper training program instead of just expecting that people are born with the necessary skills. Having worked IT in a variety of capacities, including training and end-user support, I'm pretty sure cluelessness is a function of training and experience, not age.
My (counter) point was that much lesser crimes committed by an individual would have completely destroyed the life of the perpetrator and probably their family. Yet high fives all around when a corporation has to put up with a couple of years of lost growth just because a number is too big for an individual to properly comprehend.