News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.9K     0 

IMG_4024.jpeg


No wonder they want to eliminate the French component in labelling. Based on this response, they clearly haven't even mastered the English component yet.

"There is a large cost in not advertising products in 2 languages,..." WTF do they think they're saying here other than demonstrating that illiteracy to the rest of us?

It does however clearly demonstrate who should not be in charge of a police force, a pension plan, a political party, or a province.
 
View attachment 666360

No wonder they want to eliminate the French component in labelling. Based on this response, they clearly haven't even mastered the English component yet.

"There is a large cost in not advertising products in 2 languages,..." WTF do they think they're saying here other than demonstrating that illiteracy to the rest of us?

It does however clearly demonstrate who should not be in charge of a police force, a pension plan, a political party, or a province.
They're saying bilingual labeling is expensive because it mandates two types of labels (I think) but distributors can just... use the bilingual label? Why would they need two?
 
They're saying bilingual labeling is expensive because it mandates two types of labels (I think) but distributors can just... use the bilingual label? Why would they need two?
No, they’re specifically saying “there’s a large cost in NOT advertising products in two languages…”. Which is just silly - there might be a savings in not doing something, but there isn’t a cost in not doing something. It might cost something in lost sales but that would imply it’s advantageous to advertise in both languages, not a disincentive.

As for labels, the cost of printing labels is exactly the same regardless of how many languages are included in the printing (other than the minuscule cost of some initial translation).

As I said, whoever is putting this nonsense out shouldn’t be entrusted to run a lemonade stand.
 
No, they’re specifically saying “there’s a large cost in NOT advertising products in two languages…”. Which is just silly - there might be a savings in not doing something, but there isn’t a cost in not doing something. It might cost something in lost sales but that would imply it’s advantageous to advertise in both languages, not a disincentive.

As for labels, the cost of printing labels is exactly the same regardless of how many languages are included in the printing (other than the minuscule cost of some initial translation).

As I said, whoever is putting this nonsense out shouldn’t be entrusted to run a lemonade stand.

Ultimately, the buck stops with Premier Danielle Smith, whose hatred of Canada is becoming more apparent.

Speaking of which, I'm glad the Premier has been unable to produce any offspring because nepotism is running strong in her family.

 
According to this story, since the UCP moratorium on renewables and "Alberta’s security requirements for renewables among the most restrictive globally," industry growth and investment has softened.


Meanwhile,

Screenshot_20250709_074605_YouTube.jpg
 
According to this story, since the UCP moratorium on renewables and "Alberta’s security requirements for renewables among the most restrictive globally," industry growth and investment has softened.


Meanwhile,

View attachment 666650
It's discouraging to constantly read stories about borderline excessively strong production from solar (e.g California), meanwhile a couple winters ago the UCP sent an emergency alert to Albertans asking them to stop using electricity because our FF-based infrastructure was at the brink of failure.
 
Smith is saying the Jasper wildfire debacle is politically motivated. Oh dear God...


Alberta premier demands apology from fire-stricken town of Jasper​

 

Back
Top