Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

ottawacitizen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#921

Post by eloisius »

gorwell wrote: post #912
makomk wrote: post #24

Headline on the front page of BBC News right now: "Trudeau vows to freeze anti-mandate protesters' bank accounts" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60383385 This feels downright dystopian, especially if the move away from cash and towards centrally-controlled electronic payment systems is anywhere near as widespread in Canada as elsewhere.

This is the real danger of the administrative state. Arresting you requires actual police officers to go out and physically do the act of arresting you. The bureaucratic state can freeze your bank account, revoke your license, and shut down your life, all remotely. And now they've set precedent for future protests. I don't know how anyone who considers themselves a liberal or Leftist can support this.

Exactly what's bothering me about this. I think you should get vaccinated. I think most of these truckers probably have very stupid reasons for not wanting to get vaccinated. But how can it not scare you to see the government wield power against demonstrations like this? Next time we're protesting an oil pipeline, what's to stop them from saying that these protests jeopardize Canada's energy security; It's disrupting critical infrastructure. They don't even have to arrest people anymore. Freeze your bank accounts, suspend your phone service, cancel your license. Without legal protections in our modern world, it wouldn't take a week for a government to turn you into a penniless vagrant.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#922

Post by mostertoaster »

_clhx wrote: post #665
sdsaga12 wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a YouTube channel that has been doing extended livestreams from the ground with both protestors and counter-protestors: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzGiDDKdphJ0GFvEd82WfYQ/vid... As I wrote elsewhere in this thread [1], I recommend taking a look at this channel or other extended livestreams to get a view from the ground if your impression of this event has been mostly shaped by articles. That recommendat…

Freedom of speech ends IMO when people can't sleep or enjoy the city they live in for a very extended time b/c of the 24/7 honking. I am all for demonstrating, but I think it is a little ridiculous what they are doing.

Or Canada could just say “you know a trucker without a vaccine really is that big of an issue”

Unless Trudeau does that, and god forbid show some humility, this will not end good for Canada.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#923

Post by rtpg »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #908
rtpg wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"got natural immunity which is superior" is factually incorrect, at least to every statistical study done by national health orgs. I see many people say "this person, who is vaccinated but got COVID anyways, is allowed to do X. Other person, who has a negative COVID test but am not vaccinated, cannot. That is hypocritical." Can someone explain the hypocrisy? People do get that negative COVID tests have relatively lit…

> "got natural immunity which is superior" is factually incorrect, at least to every statistical study done by national health orgs. Natural immunity of an unvaccinated person is superior to a vaccinated person without natural immunity, all else equal, and the difference isn't even close. It concerns me that people still don't accept this. See https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v... for conclu…

Non peer-reviewed preprint from August 2021.

Meanwhile we have the CDC showing that:

- previous COVID exposure + no vaccination is 3x smaller incidence than vaccination without covid exposure

BUT

- previous COVID exposure + vaccination is 2x smaller incidence than without vaccination

arguing that "I got exposed to Covid so the vaccine is not useful for me" is factually incorrect. I had not been clear enough in my objection. So protesting vax mandates have even one less leg to stand on.

(at least here: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm?s_cid=mm...).

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#924

Post by eloisius »

jsnodlin wrote: post #149
makomk wrote: post #24

Headline on the front page of BBC News right now: "Trudeau vows to freeze anti-mandate protesters' bank accounts" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60383385 This feels downright dystopian, especially if the move away from cash and towards centrally-controlled electronic payment systems is anywhere near as widespread in Canada as elsewhere.

Good, blocking critical infrastructure and affecting hundreds of thousands of bottom lines is a crime.

Would a general strike be a crime for blocking hundreds of thousands of bottom lines?

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#925

Post by Nursie »

mostertoaster wrote: post #922
_clhx wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom of speech ends IMO when people can't sleep or enjoy the city they live in for a very extended time b/c of the 24/7 honking. I am all for demonstrating, but I think it is a little ridiculous what they are doing.

Or Canada could just say “you know a trucker without a vaccine really is that big of an issue” Unless Trudeau does that, and god forbid show some humility, this will not end good for Canada.

Why? A tiny minority of truckers is making a huge fuss over really very little - a vaccine being mandated to cross the border.

In what way will this "not end good for Canada"?

Most likely the blockades will be shut down and everyone else will be able to get on with life.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#926

Post by rayiner »

tptacek wrote: post #835
rayiner wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abortion is far more serious. Abortion always directly ends a human life. Not getting vaccinated creates at most an indirect increase in the probability of other people getting sick and dying—probably a minuscule fraction of one life. Many decisions we make every day have similar statistical effects—taking an international flight which kills people through pollution, or buying products the production of which creates…

Doesn't that analysis depend a whole lot on a very complicated metaphysical question of when a "human life" begins? The moment of conception? That's a fringe belief and the only answer to the question that makes your argument cohere perfectly.

I think it’s a purely scientific question with a simple answer. After conception, the organism is plainly alive. Like if we found it on Mars we would say we found life on Mars. It’s also human according to its genetics—which is generally how we decide what species something happens to be.

I don’t know why you’d call that a “fringe belief.” Fully 38% of the public holds that view: https://www.wbur.org/npr/730183531/poll-majority-want-to-kee....

I suspect when most people assert that “life doesn’t begin at conception” they’re not referring to the literal beginning of human life, but the metaphysical question of when “human life that justifies legal protection” begins. That I agree is complex.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#927

Post by walkhour »

cardy31 wrote: post #815
tw600040 wrote: post #436

When protests were happening in India this is what Trudeau had to say: "Let me remind you, Canada will always be there to defend the rights of peaceful protesters. We believe in the process of dialogue. We’ve reached out through multiple means to the Indian authorities to highlight our concerns. This is a moment for all of us to pull together,"Justin Trudeau said. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/situation-is-…

But they aren’t being peaceful in Ottawa. They tried to burn down a condo building last night and have terrorized residents there for weeks now.

Every protest will have that one percent of idiots that will make it violent. Whether you ignore them or obsess over them tells more about you than about the protest.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#928

Post by Hakashiro »

wyager wrote: post #897
andrew_ wrote: post #411

The number of comments on this that are just fine with wild authoritarian abuses like this "because vaccines are good" is astounding. People have such idealogical myopia and are shocked and appalled when the same measures are used against their interests.

The amount of object-level thinking on modern HN is disappointing but not surprising. Even as recently as 5-6 years ago you could generally rely on HN users being smart enough to at least comprehend the meta-level issues at stake; there no longer seems to be much awareness at this level.

Care to elaborate what you would have expected instead?

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#929

Post by wpdev_63 »

tekstar wrote: post #540
hiyer wrote: post #440

When a section of Indian farmers imposed similar blockades on Indian highways, Trudeau was shilling their "right to protest" to pander to his Sikh voters. This despite the fact that the Indian protests were far from peaceful - devolving into riots[1], and the protest sites being venues for rapes[2] and gruesome murders[3,4]. With peaceful protests in his own backyard, Trudeau has forced private organisations to block…

I am not a fan of Trudeau, but I do live in Ottawa. These are not peaceful protests. It's an occupation backed by our extreme right wing and significantly funded by people in other countries (cough). It's been terrorizing local residents night and day. Too loud to sleep, get harassed if you leave your house, and in one case the occupiers attempted to light an apartment building on fire and trap the residents inside.…

No post body was provided.

Re: Trudeau Invokes Emergencies Act

#930

Post by walkhour »

jsjsbdkj wrote: post #538
daenz wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The Canadian people are overwhelmingly vaccinated and don't mind wearing masks. 90+% of truckers are fully vaccinated. Then why require the mandate? I haven't seen any answer to that question besides the implied: "because we demand full compliance."

Do you understand how public health works? The vaccine does not 100% prevent any infection, it reduces the odds and intensity. Some people cannot be vaccinated for legitimate medical reasons. You would think computer people would understand "defense in depth". Meanwhile, anti-vaccine people are single-handedly working to revive diseases that were almost eradicated: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2019/03/2…

> Do you understand how public health works?

Is the science settled on whether 90% vs 100% has an impact on the health of society given omicron?

> Meanwhile, anti-vaccine people are single-handedly working to revive diseases that were almost eradicated

Conflating traditional anti vaxers with the new COVID anti vaxers is dishonest, they actually usually come from different parts of the political spectrum.

Post reply on HN