HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #14461  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 2:20 AM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,922
Quote:
Originally Posted by SignalHillHiker View Post
The old Battery Hotel, now rechristened the Signal Hill Campus of Memorial University of Newfoundland, is nearing completion of its renovations.

I was so hoping the new addition at bottom would be the style of the existing building. But nope. It's basically done, people are already moving into offices. They kept the old-fashioned white top (which, really, looks like something that should be on wheels in Antarctica) and just hamstrung the new addition around the bottom.

Some minor things to wrap up, but this is basically finished:



I feel sad. We have a half dozen or so current projects on the go (nothing super exciting, I think 6 floors is the highest) and all of them could just as easily fit here as in the Construction thread.
It's disappointing, like the worst of the 50s, 60s, and 70s all in the same place.

But I did actually like the white "presence" on a hill otherwise almost devoid of any man made focal points.

You also forgot about the new hotel downtown, which is 12 stories.

Last edited by Architype; Aug 17, 2018 at 4:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14462  
Old Posted Aug 17, 2018, 7:59 PM
HomeInMyShoes's Avatar
HomeInMyShoes HomeInMyShoes is offline
arf
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Pile 'O Bones
Posts: 11,389
The only thing nice about the Battery Hotel is the great view of downtown at night. Otherwise it is bulldozer ready.
__________________

-- “We heal each other with kindness, gentleness and respect.” -- Richard Wagamese
-- “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” -- Dr. Seuss
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14463  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 3:20 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
As seen on SSC ;)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 5,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
Well, yeah, that's sort of the point.

Let's say you have no intention of ever learning Polish, hate Polish food, find their Catholicism annoying, and generally want to have nothing to do with Poles if you can help it, living in a ghetto so you can avoid interacting with them (not that you'd understand them if you did, anyway) ... can you explain why on Earth you'd want to relocate to Poland?

Seems to me you should pick some other place, no? Clearly it's not the right place for you.
I would probably agree with that logic but the reason it doesn't weigh very strongly on my stance is that I mostly view it as a red herring. In other words, it isn't likely that many people who hate everything (or most things) about a country would intentionally want to immigrate here. At least not common enough to deserve attention over many other more pressing political issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lio45 View Post
"Respecting laws" is, IMO, too basic a requirement. As someone123 points out, if his neighbor thinks he should be executed for homosexuality while never crossing the fence into illegality, it's still uncomfortable - and divisive, and weakening. Even though the gay hater fully meets your low bar.
For me that's a tricky issue since it's getting into opinion policing. If someone has a strong opinion on a particular issue but respects the rule of law and doesn't infringe the those boundaries, I find it risky to be selecting based on opinions we (whoever happens to be in power at the time) don't like. Not that it isn't a valid discussion, of course. By my saying that it seems risky or makes me uncomfortable doesn't equate to me saying that it's automatically unacceptable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123 View Post
I am not sure you see this from my perspective.

I think it is so unlikely that the death penalty for homosexuality will be implemented in Canada that it is not something I worry about, sure.

But I live with my same-sex partner and we have to deal with our neighbours. For us there's a big difference if the guy who moves in next door is fine with us vs. if he would like us to be put to death but tolerates just being a bit hateful toward us because he is in Canada. Also there's a difference between whether you feel that 95% of people at your work are going to be OK with you being gay or you decide not to say anything because it is more like 50/50. Do you take your chances if you know that 1/4 of your coworkers are religious fundamentalists?

I realize these are not pleasant things to think about but they're a fact of life, and I truly am against Canada bringing in religious fundamentalists who think I should be killed. I would be 100% okay with filtering those people out.

I would not pick this as my #1 most burning concern but we can talk about more than one issue at a time. But I do take issue with the notion that anybody who brings up immigrants or selectivity along any kind of cultural lines can't have a good reason for doing so and must be racist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Not seriously. But the tone of the discussion sometimes leads in that general direction.

What else can we deduce from comments that we can't demand of immigrants certain things unless almost all Canadians live up to the ideal?
To be clear, my comments were intended to be a bit more nuanced than how they appear to have been received. My position has never been that the topic of problems with immigration due to cultural conflicts can't/shouldn't ever be discussed. It's obvious to me that immigratingis a huge adjustment and it certainly won't always go smoothly. I would never try to suggest otherwise. I'm just pointing out that these issues should be discussed with care since it can cause tension, increase negative perceptions, stir up conflict, and trigger discrimination that affects the lives of many people if handled carelessly.

The same way there has been many criticisms of the news media for the whole "if it bleeds it leads" approach which has them focusing disproportionately on scary stories involving crime and violence and other things that get higher ratings but are also linked to increased stress, fear, and pessimism among the general public, if politicians or other officials use similar tactics pertaining to the topic of immigration to get higher ratings (aka voter approval) there are similar social costs. So it isn't that for instance the news should never talk about crime, nor that politicians should never talk about problems with immigration, but rather that it's a delicate topic that must be handled as such and not used flippantly for "ratings" (which can be very easily done since it's an emotional topic that people are susceptible to). Any time that there's a sense that someone is raising these topics gratuitously and recklessly, and placing a disproportionate level of attention on them, there's good reason for that to be criticized. The same way that people shouldn't be afraid to have these discussions since they're important and legitimate issues, people should also not be afraid to criticize poor handling of them.
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14464  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 11:23 AM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Monsieur Sainte-Nitouche
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 33,553
Sadly semi-predictable. CBC might also want to be careful about how they word their headlines in the future.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...ipeg-1.4789917
__________________
The end of the world ain't what it used to be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14465  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 1:04 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 14,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Sadly semi-predictable. CBC might also want to be careful about how they word their headlines in the future.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...ipeg-1.4789917
I don't get it. What's the issue with the headline?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14466  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 1:31 PM
Acajack's Avatar
Acajack Acajack is online now
Monsieur Sainte-Nitouche
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vieux Canada
Posts: 33,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
I don't get it. What's the issue with the headline?
What does Maxime Bernier have to do with sawing off a sign in a park in Winnipeg? Did he urge people to do it?
__________________
The end of the world ain't what it used to be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14467  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 1:49 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 14,444
To note the two together, in a way that implies possible cause and effect, seems fine to me. I admit, however, that there may be an agenda at work.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14468  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 4:01 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 15,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
What does Maxime Bernier have to do with sawing off a sign in a park in Winnipeg? Did he urge people to do it?
He singled it out as a bad example of ‘extreme multiculturalism’. Right after he went on a bender about how bad more diversity is. Then he doubled down in response.

Quote:
He has since defended himself by tweeting he did not intend to criticize diversity itself, but rather "ever more of it."
It’s almost like this kind of rhetoric appeals to certain racist fringe elements every time it is used. If only there was a word for it...
__________________
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire

https://clockzillakingoflaval.tumblr.com

Last edited by O-tacular; Aug 18, 2018 at 9:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14469  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 4:16 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 15,604
An intelligent critique of Bernier’s statements:

https://globalnews.ca/news/4393645/r...ier-diversity/
__________________
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire

https://clockzillakingoflaval.tumblr.com
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14470  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 4:39 PM
Rollerstud98 Rollerstud98 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 850
I read that article, that senator who tweeted about it is a complete moron. Sign itself seems to be untouched just the legs sawed off. Her extremism of saying the sign was completely destroyed doesn’t help anyone. Just stoking the fire of divisiveness.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14471  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 4:52 PM
niwell's Avatar
niwell niwell is offline
sick transit, gloria
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brockton Village, Toronto
Posts: 8,005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Acajack View Post
Sadly semi-predictable. CBC might also want to be careful about how they word their headlines in the future.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manit...ipeg-1.4789917

Serious question - are we supposed to just pretend these things are coincidences? I'm not a fan of taking everything said by those in power at face value, as everyone has an agenda of some sort. By extension, impartiality is largely a myth. This goes for the media as well, FWIW.
__________________
Check out my pics of Johannesburg
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14472  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 4:56 PM
milomilo milomilo is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-tacular View Post
An intelligent critique of Bernier’s statements:

https://globalnews.ca/news/4393645/r...ier-diversity/
I agree with this article and question why Bernier is going out of his way to say this. But his tweets are being painted as more controversial than they actually are. What he has said is basically a truism - that we should welcome diversity, but not too much diversity. That's impossible to disagree with - 'too much' of something is by definition too much.

As usual, the left leaning voices have shown themselves to be just as over-reactionary as the right leaning voices, deliberately choosing to interpret something in the worst possible way rather than the way it was intended.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14473  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 4:59 PM
kwoldtimer kwoldtimer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: La vraie capitale
Posts: 14,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
I agree with this article and question why Bernier is going out of his way to say this. But his tweets are being painted as more controversial than they actually are. What he has said is basically a truism - that we should welcome diversity, but not too much diversity. That's impossible to disagree with - 'too much' of something is by definition too much.

As usual, the left leaning voices have shown themselves to be just as over-reactionary as the right leaning voices, deliberately choosing to interpret something in the worst possible way rather than the way it was intended.
How do you know it's incorrect to interpret it "in the worst possible way"? If Bernier didn't feel there was a problem, his tweets would make even less sense. Unless, ego-driven type that he is, it was just a way to keep his name front and centre as "the alternative".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14474  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 6:01 PM
milomilo milomilo is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,806
I'm not sure what his motives are, but he's not really saying there is problem now but more warning what it could lead to in the future, and what he has said really isn't controversial if you read what he wrote rather than what people want to assume he thinks. So if the only problem is that Bernier is tweeting for his own ego's sake, then the best course of action would just be to ignore him rather than spend a week promoting them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14475  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 6:01 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 19,911
It's wikipedia's fault if that Winnipeg sign got sawed off.

Here's what it says. Very negative and inflammatory! Needs to be censored immediately.

Quote:
The partition displaced over 14 million people along religious lines, creating overwhelming refugee crises in the newly constituted dominions; there was large-scale violence, with estimates of loss of life accompanying or preceding the partition disputed and varying between several hundred thousand and two million. The violent nature of the partition created an atmosphere of hostility and suspicion between India and Pakistan that plagues their relationship to the present.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14476  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 6:05 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 19,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwoldtimer View Post
How do you know it's incorrect to interpret it "in the worst possible way"? If Bernier didn't feel there was a problem, his tweets would make even less sense. Unless, ego-driven type that he is, it was just a way to keep his name front and centre as "the alternative".
There's clearly a bit of a problem there (as demonstrated by actual, documented cases of blatant failure to integrate), but as milomilo points out, we don't need to wait until it worsens to bring it up as a problem. Raising a red flag ahead of time (while we can still correct course) is actually the smart thing to do.

Your logic is similar to saying that Earth is still cool enough to be viable at the moment, therefore there's no need to pay any attention to those alarmists who keep breaking our balls about that potential global warming menace.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14477  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 6:12 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 19,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
The same way there has been many criticisms of the news media for the whole "if it bleeds it leads" approach which has them focusing disproportionately on scary stories involving crime and violence and other things that get higher ratings but are also linked to increased stress, fear, and pessimism among the general public, if politicians or other officials use similar tactics pertaining to the topic of immigration to get higher ratings (aka voter approval) there are similar social costs. So it isn't that for instance the news should never talk about crime, nor that politicians should never talk about problems with immigration, but rather that it's a delicate topic that must be handled as such and not used flippantly for "ratings" (which can be very easily done since it's an emotional topic that people are susceptible to). Any time that there's a sense that someone is raising these topics gratuitously and recklessly, and placing a disproportionate level of attention on them, there's good reason for that to be criticized. The same way that people shouldn't be afraid to have these discussions since they're important and legitimate issues, people should also not be afraid to criticize poor handling of them.
Agreed, but using this logic - which I agree with - the people guilty of causing problems / exacerbating tensions are the dangerous idiots who are spinning those comments into something they're not. Why are they doing this? That's super divisive. Even in this thread, it's contributed to creating needless division among people who normally should all be somewhat like-minded. If the election were today, I'd vote CPC (unlike last time) just because of this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14478  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 6:13 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 19,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
I would probably agree with that logic but the reason it doesn't weigh very strongly on my stance is that I mostly view it as a red herring.
The same way global warming is a red herring because the winter of 2017-2018 was uncomfortably cold in Southern Quebec...?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14479  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 6:20 PM
lio45 lio45 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lévis, QC
Posts: 19,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
For me that's a tricky issue since it's getting into opinion policing. If someone has a strong opinion on a particular issue but respects the rule of law and doesn't infringe the those boundaries, I find it risky to be selecting based on opinions we (whoever happens to be in power at the time) don't like. Not that it isn't a valid discussion, of course.
I wholeheartedly agree that we're never going to see opinion policing of the people who are already here (born here / citizens), and that we're stuck with them... but if we're opening our doors to outsiders, and there's lots more candidates than slots, what's the harm in selecting the best candidates?

Someone with a few PhDs and several million dollars in assets who thinks all gays should immediately be beheaded is still, all things considered, a "good catch" for us as an immigrant, but the latter trait is something that should take away points from his overall candidacy.

Given the choice between two equally-qualified immigrants on paper (in terms of diplomas and skills), I'd rather take the one who doesn't think women are inferior and only suited to child rearing, or that they should be hidden from public view, that gays should all be killed, that the Earth was created from scratch 5,000 years ago by a flying spaghetti monster, that the Earth is flat, that global warming is a hoax, etc. etc. etc.

What's the harm in choosing the best immigrants...? Why not do it? People are clamoring to come here, it's up to us to pick the best.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14480  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2018, 6:31 PM
rousseau's Avatar
rousseau rousseau is offline
Registered Drug User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 4,641
How is it not possible to step back and see this as completely topsy-turvy?

A statue of the first PM of Canada is taken down for perceived crimes against aboriginals, while at the same time the leader of a bloody movement to establish a new country based solely on religious ethnicity that led to the deaths of a million people is commemorated by naming a park after him?

In a sop to multicultural niceties, a political figure associated with essentially the most non-multicultural ideology and actions imaginable is celebrated?

This is incoherent nonsense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:17 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.