News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.8K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5K     0 

Here's something to consider: even if the governmental entity will be defunct, Peel will in all likelihood--*should* in all likelihood--remain a geographic entity, recognized by the census, one with a long history going back to the c19, etc. And if the region-wide police force--or a region-wide *anything*--remains post-region, there's nothing wrong with it retaining the historical name, unless someone decides that the, uh, "good name" of Sir Robert Peel has sufficient skeletons to require cancellation a la Dundas or Ryerson...
Technically the police force isn't region-wide anyway, it's OPP in Caledon, whereas Peel Police only serves Brampton and Mississauga.
 
Probably more of a *shrug* what-can-you-do.
But really; the biggest victim of all of this is a kind of old-school "municipal identity"--that is, when townships and towns are reduced to wards within an amalgamated entity, it reduces said identity to something rather utilitarian: less about "place" than about "representation".

And I'm just reflecting on how utterly *extinct* this kind of once-drilled-into-our-heads lay-of-the-land is
The visualizing of Ontario in terms of county boundaries, or of places shown according to population size (or the charms of looking up the population figures in the map index)--who has that kind of "mental map" anymore?
Or even the more elaborate, back-roady 80s-style maps, with their more elaborate depictions of municipal boundaries.

People don't have such mental maps of Ontario anymore. Their Ontario might as well be boundary-free, population-size-free. Or even map-free, in a GPS age. So within that void of palpable *map* identity, the kind of municipal structure doesn't matter anymore except in the most utilitarian terms...
I agree. I'm a map guy; never touched a GPS in my life. When travelling in a new area, I like to get a map for the area so I can see what is off but near my route that might be of interest. Not a fan of just following a moving line on a screen.

Some of the amalgamated municipalities are so large that I can't see how they develop a sense of community. I don't imagine there is a lot of common cause between Burritt's Rapids and downtown Ottawa.
 
Last edited:
When travelling in a new area, I like to get a map for the area so I can see what is off but near my route that might be of interest. Not a fan of just following a moving line on a screen.
I'm the same way. Whenever I've used Google Maps, I always find I stick to areas that I know about and want to go. But I have a nice collection of atlases, and in doing so I've found places I never would've otherwise; the logic, I guess, is that "I paid for the whole book, so why not look at every part of it and see what's there?"

I've found a lot of things to see in New York in this way that I would never have found on Google Maps.
 
I agree. I'm a map guy; never touched a GS in my life. When travelling in a new area, I like to get a map for the area so I can see what is off but near my route that might be of interest. Not a fan of just following a moving line on a screen.

Some of the amalgamated municipalities are so large that I can't see how they develop a sense of community. I don't image there is a lot of common cause between Burritt's Rapids and downtown Ottawa.
I presume that the prevailing logic these days is that when it comes to "sense of community", the abstraction of municipal boundaries has become irrelevant, even redundant. (And Google doesn't even provide them unless you "program them in" for a specific place as a search term. Which requires *you* acting, rather than them being passively "offered to you".)

In a strange way, *parliamentary* boundaries (which have a way of shifting every decade) have arguably become more of a "place definer" than municipal boundaries.
 
I'm the same way. Whenever I've used Google Maps, I always find I stick to areas that I know about and want to go. But I have a nice collection of atlases, and in doing so I've found places I never would've otherwise; the logic, I guess, is that "I paid for the whole book, so why not look at every part of it and see what's there?"

I've found a lot of things to see in New York in this way that I would never have found on Google Maps.
In some ways, it depends on *how* one uses Google Maps--and ironically, it helps when you've already used regular maps and atlases for the given area (or just in general), thus you're conditioned to use it as an "enhanced" version of the same. But it really only works as such when you're doing it on a computer, rather than on a phone or a dashboard--and thus are even able to use it in a fossil-fuel-free travel-proxy way of "Streetview surfing", et al. And I also find that using it as such, my preferred default is satellite view rather than map view. (Of course, that's impractical on the run--otherwise you might find urban tourists whipping out their laptops rather than their phones in order to figure out where they are or where they're going.)

One problem, though, is that unlike print maps which "capture a moment", Google only captures the ever-changing present (other than past dates by way of Streetview)--it's a functional tool, not a "historical document". And another problem which comes to mind when you refer to "things to see in New York" (and particularly when I think of New York *State*) is, again, that nagging sense of "boundarylessness"--as opposed to the traditional Rand McNally or state-map standard of showing county (or in insets, city) boundaries or highlighting county seats.
 
I tend to drop minimum wage comparisons in this thread from time to time, to beat my drum on the subject of what I consider an unreasonably low minimum wage here in Ontario.

I try not to do this unendingly, but when there is actual news from another jurisdiction.

A country to which Canada is often compared is Australia, and they just announced this year's minimum wage increase:

1686252370773.png


Adjusted that to CAD this minimum wage there will be $21.31 CAD per hour.

Australia does have a slightly higher cost of living, but not by much, about 15%

If you adjust the target downward to reflect that, you would still get a minimum wage of $18.54 per hour, significantly above where our minimum wage is set.
 
What say the engineers here at UT?
Heard a lot of complaints about it.
From what I understand, PEO did this without consulting membership.
Most that I've spoken to are wondering how this ensures those future PEs understand local regulations.
 
Heard a lot of complaints about it.
From what I understand, PEO did this without consulting membership.

I understand why that would be offputting; though given that they were compelled under law to do this; consultation would probably have been window dressing.

Most that I've spoken to are wondering how this ensures those future PEs understand local regulations.

They are still required to pass exams, among other things. I'm not sure what's on said exams, and whether that subject is covered. Its certainly a fair question, and one PEO ought to have a fulsome answer for.

Let me just throw in a link to my post on this so its easier to find.

 
I understand why that would be offputting; though given that they were compelled under law to do this; consultation would probably have been window dressing.
The feeling among some seems to be that PEO, along with the rich engineers that own firms, are happy to go along with this as it will depress wages.

It also disadvantages Canadian engineering graduates. Canadian engineering programs are incredibly competitive to enter, where students are already competing for very limited spaces with huge numbers of international students. Now upon graduation, they still need Canadian experience under a P. Eng to eventually become one themselves but are competing with people with no such requirement.

That being said, I am not an engineer, so I don't know all the specifics. I know PEO updated a lot of licensing standards over the last year.
 
Last edited:
The feeling among some seems to be that PEO, along with the rich engineers that own firms, are happy to go along with this as it will depress wages.

I can understand that sentiment. Though as with any Guild-ed profession (law, much of the trades, medicine) there is a certain artificial wage inflation by putting up barriers to entry.

There's a balance to be struck; whether the gov't has landed in a fair and reasonable place, I can't judge, at least at this moment.

It also disadvantages Canadian engineering graduates. Canadian engineering programs are incredibly competitive to enter, where students are already competing for very limited spaces with huge numbers of international students. Now upon graduation, they still need Canadian experience under a P. Eng to eventually become one themselves but are competing with people with no such requirement.

That does seem unreasonable and probably ought to be replaced by a general work experience requirement or at least least offer credit from some types of foreign experience to domestic grads.

There does need to be a level playing field. Of note though, there is a work experience requirement, it just doesn't have to be Canadian anymore, for those foreign grads.

* I would add, at this juncture that while I 100% support high standards, particularly for certification to work, I do think we probably have too few domestic study positions, which is in part what drives the demand for foreign grads.
 
I can understand that sentiment. Though as with any Guild-ed profession (law, much of the trades, medicine) there is a certain artificial wage inflation by putting up barriers to entry.

There's a balance to be struck; whether the gov't has landed in a fair and reasonable place, I can't judge, at least at this moment.
Most engineering positions don't pay very well already. You can make more on the tools in many cases than the average engineer.

I am also surprised by this - because as far as I know there isn't much of an engineering shortage. Just a few years ago, the problem was that most engineering graduates were underemployed, i.e. not working in their field of study. I have two people (with Canadian degrees) working for me right now in this exact situation.


"By a wide margin, employed individuals with bachelor’s degrees or higher in engineering did not work in their field of study compared with those with medical, law, nursing or education degrees. The percentage of people with engineering degrees who actually worked as engineers or engineering managers was lower in Ontario than in any of the five provinces to which it was compared, and Canada as a whole. In Ontario, just 29.7 per cent of individuals with engineering degrees worked as engineers or engineering managers. This compares with almost 46 per cent of similarly educated individuals in Alberta, for instance."
 
If the Cons form government in Ottawa it won’t be good for Ford.

I wouldn't read too much into a 7 pt lead for the CPC given how inefficient their vote is and that this comes amidst a rather embarrassing display with the Chinese electoral interference dog and pony show.
 

Back
Top