Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)O

ordinarycanuck

@ renhogan @lemmy.ca

Posts
10
Comments
26
Joined
2 mo. ago

  • Mississauga could soon make ‘once-in-a-generation’ transformation to its downtown core

    Jump

  • These developments should have been started decades ago.Hazel prevented Mississauga from being a prosperous Metropolis and now it's playing catch up

  • Why?

    Jump

  • I guess it’s preference and everyone has different palates. Personally I don’t like A&W or McDonalds coffee.

    I cannot drink Tim’s Original roast though, tastes like watered down coffee. Their dark roast is the only one I can drink.

  • Why?

    Jump

  • Because they are lazy and have cups in their car left over from either earlier in the day or previous days, and since theres no garbage there they toss them out.The argument some people have here, "they used to have garbages, but have removed them, so litter away! " seeminlgy justifying this behvaiour in an odd pro-litter protest is crazy.Almost every other fast-food restaurant with take out windows has 0 garbage bins, but you don't see their trash at the order kiosk.

  • Why?

    Jump

  • Most drive thru's for every other fast food business don't have garbages. You don't see trash around their order windows.

  • Why?

    Jump

  • the coffee is terrible

    I hear that a lot. I’m pretty into coffee myself; buy different beans, roast my own beans etc., and honestly their dark roast (when it’s fresh), is actually decent

    I get people have issues with the brand overall, but the coffee itself isn’t nearly as bad as people make it out to be.Everything else you said I agree with.

  • Why?

    Jump

  • I’m not defending companies removing bins, they should absolutely take responsibility for waste they generate. But that doesn’t justify littering. Both things can be true: companies should do better, and individuals should still take responsibility for their own garbage.

  • Why?

    Jump

  • You can throw your cups out at the house when you arrive home directly into your blue bins.

    Disgusting culture / people who do this.

  • Why?

    Jump

  • If you every have the opportunity to visit Japan you’ll notice they don’t have garbage bins anywhere and there’s trash nowhere to be found.

    I think it’s a cultural/societal problem. Not a lack of trash bin problem.

  • Mississauga @lemmy.ca
    ordinarycanuck @lemmy.ca

    Why?

  • Mississauga Makes the “World’s Least Affordable Cities to Buy a Home” list, at number 13.

    Jump

  • They aren't in the Top20 for World unaffordability.

  • Erin Mills Parkway

    Jump

  • You must not drive on this street very much if that's your opinion on EMP. Vehicle operators don't seem to understand the speed of the street is 70 km/hr. It’s a 3-lane wide road that everyone seems to go 50-60km/hr on when the speed limit is posted to 70. It comes down to an awareness issue, which is evident as many drivers in this City don't seem to have any.

  • Mississauga @lemmy.ca
    ordinarycanuck @lemmy.ca

    Mississauga Makes the “World’s Least Affordable Cities to Buy a Home” list, at number 13.

  • Mississauga @lemmy.ca
    ordinarycanuck @lemmy.ca

    Break-and-enters up more than 13% in Mississauga and Brampton

    www.insauga.com /break-and-enters-up-more-than-13-in-mississauga-and-brampton/
  • Mississauga @lemmy.ca
    ordinarycanuck @lemmy.ca

    Erin Mills Parkway

  • We attacked Iran with no clear plan for regime change, Israeli security sources say

    Jump

  • The War on Drugs absolutely caused serious harm and disproportionately impacted minority communities. That’s widely documented. But acknowledging that doesn’t make it equivalent to governments intentionally killing civilians. Harmful policy and discriminatory enforcement are not the same thing as deliberate mass slaughter. Conflating those two things is exactly the kind of false equivalence that derails serious discussion.Are you actually arguing that the War on Drugs is equivalent to governments intentionally slaughtering their own civilians?

    Because acknowledging that the policy caused harm and was discriminatory doesn’t make it the same category of wrongdoing as deliberate mass killing.

  • We attacked Iran with no clear plan for regime change, Israeli security sources say

    Jump

  • Harmful policy and deliberate mass killing are not the same thing.

    The War on Drugs has caused real damage, but comparing incarceration and social harm to governments intentionally slaughtering civilians is exactly the kind of false equivalence that makes serious discussions impossible.

  • We attacked Iran with no clear plan for regime change, Israeli security sources say

    Jump

  • You need to understand both of these things are bad. they aren't mutually exclusive.

  • We attacked Iran with no clear plan for regime change, Israeli security sources say

    Jump

  • You have to see the bigger picture in this context though, this is unprecedented. Iran obtaining and securing enriched Uranium and having Nuclear capable missiles will be a threat to the World. This is bigger than sticking to a morale compass. This is why Humanity is the true plague of this Planet and why there will never be Peace on Earth.I don't want more people to die, as many others don't. But to just sit back and let Iran become untouchable and thinking everything will continue to be OK is naive.

  • We attacked Iran with no clear plan for regime change, Israeli security sources say

    Jump

  • I don’t think anyone here is celebrating bombing or war. Military action is always a terrible outcome.

    The concern many people have is what happens if nothing is done and WHEN Iran eventually acquires nuclear weapons. Once a regime that already sponsors militant groups and represses its own population has nuclear-capable warheads, the ability to prevent escalation becomes far more limited.

    At that point, the world isn’t choosing between diplomacy and intervention anymore, it’s choosing between living with a nuclear-armed regime like that or risking a much larger conflict later. That’s the dilemma people are talking about.

  • We attacked Iran with no clear plan for regime change, Israeli security sources say

    Jump

  • You’re putting words in people’s mouths. No one said they’re “fine with” deaths in the U.S. Those are serious issues and they absolutely deserve attention and policy solutions.

    The point being made was simply that domestic social problems and state-directed violence or terrorism are different categories under international law. Acknowledging that distinction doesn’t mean someone doesn’t care about both.

    Both can be bad at the same time. Recognizing that isn’t controversial.

  • We attacked Iran with no clear plan for regime change, Israeli security sources say

    Jump

  • Those are serious domestic policy failures and they absolutely deserve criticism. But they’re still not the same thing as a government deliberately carrying out mass violence against civilians or supporting armed groups abroad.

    Recognizing that distinction isn’t “normalizing” loss of life, it’s acknowledging that different problems require different responses.

  • We attacked Iran with no clear plan for regime change, Israeli security sources say

    Jump

  • We attacked Iran with no clear plan for regime change, Israeli security sources say

    Jump

  • You're comparing social crises to state-directed mass killing. Those aren’t equivalent under international law or humanitarian doctrine. The threshold people talk about for intervention is typically genocide, ethnic cleansing, or large-scale state violence against civilians.

    Social problems like drug overdoses and gun violence are not the same as a government slaughtering civilians. Conflating the two is a false equivalence.