Pierre Poilievre is a dangerous man that shouldn’t be allowed to have the opportunity to lead our country.
Regardless of who wins Canadians will still lose
CONTENT WARNING: A vertically-oriented video in a player with no volume control on Instagram involving Jordan Peterson.
I thought it was a good video worth watching, but she’s gotta fix her audio levels.
And yeah Instagram sucks, but it’s where people are.
I believe that’s a war crime.
My God, thanks for the warning. Sounds truly terrible
We are so screwed if he becomes Prime Minster.
In case PP and JP were wondering, racism in Canada has a very long history. Well before we “invented” it due to “wokeism”. To think that the potential future leader of Canada would deny racism was even a thing in this country is alarming.
“Racism was imported” Some time before he think it had happened
……………… isn’t Jordan Peterson in a mental asylum?
Well, that tells you a lot about Poilièvre…
He moved to Florida (https://globalnews.ca/news/10916773/jordan-peterson-moves-to-us-leaves-canada/) … so kinda
Isn’t that the same thing nowadays?
Aka Florida.
I want to like this person’s reporting, but I just can’t get over the urge to reach through the screen and push her out of the way so I can actually see what the fuck she’s talking about.
Seriously, I get that there’s tons of pressure to standout in visual platforms by highlighting yourself in your work, but I’d still like her content even if her face wasn’t constantly in it.
I can’t stand this form of content, or the delivery, but it’s where audiences are so I’m willing to accept that I’m just old and lame.
Building off this a bit, I think the reason why it bothers me so much isn’t just because it’s distracting, it also has this unintended toxic effect of tying the value of what someone’s saying directly to their appearance. It’s exhausting watching new generations of people re-equate truth and beauty again and again in ever more insidious and pervasive ways with new technology.
Yeah her videos set off major alarm bells in my mind just because of the association of the type of content with this format being used to manipulate people. Even though when I’ve watched them it has been pretty sensible.
I get what you’re saying, but it’s where and how people are and consuming misinformation.
Matching that style may be the only way to get some truth through.
Petterson is the ultimate regime whore… Your life sucks because you didn’t make your bed, Brayden. If only you were smart and worked harder, maybe your life wouldn’t suck.
I known doctors and lawyers working 100 hour weeks, and they love it. Trust me bro, you ain’t got it. So get back to your shiti job, make your bed.
Response to wrong post?
Is this post not about a political regime whore using media regime whore to target limp dick cucks while daddy musk is jerking off in the coroner?
Asking for a friend.
Content seems to be behind a login-wall.
Aw man sorry about that. It’s on Instagram. Normally you should be able to view it without logging in?
So, taking the total GDP/business investment of one country and dividing it by the number of workers of said country is bad, but taking the total income of men/women and dividing it by the total hours worked for men/women is good to prove the gender pay gap. Sure.
P.S they are both shitty comparisons.
I’m not sure I understand. Can you please explain?
Her argument is basically (from what I understand), that the way Pierre Poilievre is calculating stuff to prove his point is too simplistic and wrong.
I think she is right - the calculation is unadjusted for discrepancies in the data. To adjust, much more has to be considered e.g where people work and live (you might earn more in a big city, but have higher living costs), how many or what percentage of people live where (more people living in cities naturally means a higher GDP), how long people work (time can be included the calculation service values), inflation (higher inflation in one country can lead to a reduce in purchasing power and reduction of the value of the currency), how the GDP is calculated (GDP calculated by one institute can include/exclude data compared to calculations by other institutes and the formulas can be different) and so on. However, and I admit this is a tangent, when the gender pay gap is brought up, most often the unadjusted value is brought up and treated as proof of injustice, when it shouldn’t.
In the United States, for example, the non-adjusted average woman’s annual salary is 79–83% of the average man’s salary, compared to 95–99% for the adjusted average salary.
