Updates from March, 2017 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Kate 21:23 on 2017/03/20 Permalink | Reply  

    A Macleans writer takes the A-13 fiasco as an indication that Quebec is riddled with social malaise. I have never heard of the two-bills-in-restaurants thing he mentions: has anyone here? He also blames the bad vibe on police protest trousers, and you can taste his politics in the phrase “limited virtues of collective bargaining.” Foo, I say.

     
    • Lucas 21:41 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      If by two-bills-in-restaurants he means being offered a tax-free meal for paying cash vs a tax-in meal when paying by card, I have encountered that many times (but not at every restaurant). I was actually very shocked when I first encountered it as it was a work function (one bill and we all had to pay cash) and the only people who objected or found it untoward were those of us who were from outside the province.

    • ant6n 23:34 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      I thought “paying cash” was a thing in Chinese restaurants

    • Kate 01:25 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      Hasn’t been in some years. All transactions now have to produce a receipt.

    • DeWolf 02:32 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      It’s hard not to see the political subtext here. High volunteerism rates are not necessarily a virtue – they’re simply an indication of poorly funded social services and cultural programs.

      Besides, wasn’t the truck driver who refused to move his rig from Ontario?

      Quebec bashing is a very real phenomenon. People in the ROC have this image of Quebec as hopelessly corrupt and incompetent, yet they fail to see the problems in their own backyard. British Columbia is just as corrupt as Quebec, the main difference being that many of the shady political practices that would land you behind bars in QC are actually legal in BC.

    • Phil C. 02:38 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      After pumping out articles like this all year round, how can the rest of Canada even be shocked at the existence of separatism. It’s pretty offensive considering we’re supposed to be part of the same country. After all, it feels like they want us to leave more than separatists do

    • Phil C. 02:44 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      I just realized that I missed the part about him working at McGill! The article sounds like its coming from such an ignorant point of view it’s kind of hard to believe this person has ever been to Quebec, let alone live here

    • jeather 07:26 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      Many academics do not get to choose where they live and thus end up resenting where they live.

    • JaneyB 09:11 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      That’s one thin article there, though I guess that’s Maclean’s for you. Just warming over the usual gruel: joie de vivre, protest pants, jaywalking, yada yada…

      The data he cites on friendship networks might be important – though Quebec society was so transformed by the Quiet Revolution, the difference between the lives of the older generations and younger ones is going to make all data hard to use. There’s a long tradition here of people socializing within their enormous families. Older people probably don’t have many friends…because they have so much family. I suspect such people do not count ‘family’ as ‘friends’ in surveys.

      I don’t find a real difference in community involvement between here and Toronto and if you take out all the ethnic organizations for the immigrants in Toronto, I suspect the similarity would be clearer still. On the Prairies, in contrast with both, the voluntarism is very noticeably strong and is often the primary way to meet new people.

      The questions he should be asking are why is Aut 13 serviced privately? Could it have anything to do with Anglo suburbs and their preference for non-Montreal services? Would the same thing have happened on Aut 25? Really, there’s a lot of Anglo standoffishness/rescue-me dance in this city; that could use a change.

    • Jack 09:29 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      I got a huge “social malaise” reading this article, anecdotes followed by assertions make bad opinion pieces.

    • Myles 11:14 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      The idea that an active labour movement is indicative of a lack of social cohesion is pretty mind-boggling.

    • Taylor C. Noakes 12:10 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      The auhor of the article is the head of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada… so now I have even more questions.

    • Josh 13:54 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

    • Kevin 14:00 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      Andrew Potter is a former journalist, although I remember him best for a piece he wrote about working at a Montreal fish market and not being allowed to stand inside when waiting for coffee.

    • Ian 14:09 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      That’s an impressive retraction, and couldn’t have been an easy one to write.

    • Jack 15:45 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      Of course now the entire Quebecor media-politico establishment is on the “Quebec bashing”
      beat-down. I wonder is this also Quebec bashing…
      http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2017/03/21/nous-vivons-dans-un-film-de-denys-arcand

  • Kate 20:19 on 2017/03/20 Permalink | Reply  

    People are excited about various notables scheduled for this summer’s Comiccon. I suppose I open myself to accusations of wet blanketry if I say I don’t get it: because you liked a character in a movie or series, it doesn’t follow that the actor will be interesting in themselves, or not in the way you expect. But people do seem to like meeting them, even if they look older and sourer than they did when they played the roles.

     
    • Blork 21:16 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      Unlike you, I totally get it. But I still think it’s stupid. ;-)

    • Faiz Imam 12:20 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      A lot of these people come to cons regularly. Their personality and demeor is well known. Tennant in particular is a very popular figure who has often been entertaining and proven.

      I agree not everyone is worth getting excited about, though the more obscure people are often the most interesting.

      I recall going to a talk with the creators of the 90’s show “Reboot”

      Packed room with hundereds of people. and the creators had many amazing and interesting stories to tell.

  • Kate 19:33 on 2017/03/20 Permalink | Reply  

    A building on Ontario East damaged by fire two years ago collapsed Monday afternoon; luckily no one was hurt.

     
  • Kate 19:31 on 2017/03/20 Permalink | Reply  

    Metro has a history lesson on who Louis-Hector de Callière was, after whom the museum is named.

     
  • Kate 09:41 on 2017/03/20 Permalink | Reply  

    For Radio-Canada, Roberto Rocha has created a terrific map showing the age of buildings in Montreal.

     
    • Max 09:47 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      Nice. Anyone know how to view the map full-screen?

    • ant6n 11:54 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      @Max
      If you’re on chrome, try this: right click on the map and select ‘inspect’. Several windows should open, one showing the html, where something is selected. Scroll up in the html view to ‘div id=”map” class=”map”‘, and select that. Make sure the shown web-page is still wide enough to map and text side-by-side. Then in the “styles” window, change “width: 50%” to “width: 100%”, and close the inspector (‘x’ in the corner).

    • Bill Binns 12:08 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      Very cool map. They have my house being constructed in 1882 but the deed says 1891 though.

    • Janet 12:47 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      What fun. I notice that my building on des Soeurs-Grises is blue, indicating 1990-2015. The building was actully constructed around 1940(?), so they’re clearly using the year it was converted to condos, even though the structure and façade are intact.

    • Robert J 12:49 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      The construction year field is probably from a database file on open data montreal. I know the file, and it’s not 100% accurate (data entry errors, I presume).

    • Kate 14:31 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      The big church in my neighbourhood is tagged as 1963, an obvious mistake. Alexis Hamel gives it 1931, much more plausible. On the other hand, the map is on the nose that the building I live in dates from 1927, which agrees with the info on my insurance policy.

      ant6n: thanks for the answer to the map question.

    • Kevin 16:07 on 2017/03/20 Permalink

      This is a fun way to show trends, but like @Robert J pointed out it’s full of errors.

      I looked up my house and instead of my building, there’s a non-existent address. The date on one of my neighbour’s buildings is off by a decade.

    • DeWolf 02:36 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      I think the problem is with the city’s own data set. Whenever a building undergoes a conversion, it’s construction date is listed as the date of conversion. I used to live next to an office building on Parc Av that was converted into condos in 2003, and its date of construction is listed as 2003 in the city’s property roll.

    • DavidH 03:01 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      Was excited to see a red dot not too far from my house, a building built in 1600! (6217 Christophe-Colomb). Turns out it’s off by over 3 centuries. It’s inconsistent in regards to conversion as well. Sometimes they change to the new reno’s date even when it’s minor. However, some on my street still have the date of the original building even when it was completely torn down and replaced (2 of those are 1950s bungalows that replaced 2 stories buildings, nothing is left from the original construction). It’s fun to compare neighborhoods though. I expected Lachine to have more red and orange.

    • dwgs 09:51 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      You may be able to find more accurate info in the Lovell guides, that’s how I found my place (although it took some detective work because of the change in street numbers at some point)
      http://bibnum2.banq.qc.ca/bna/lovell/

    • Max 12:32 on 2017/03/21 Permalink

      Thanks, ant6n, but I contacted the author and he provided me this link:

      https://cbcnews.carto.com/viz/bd7514d3-3343-44ad-a419-8072d3fa048f/embed_map

      No filtering by time period, but still plenty handy.

  • Kate 09:33 on 2017/03/20 Permalink | Reply  

    Charges are to be stayed against 36 people charged in the RCMP drug bust Project Clemenza. Delay in getting to trial is one factor, the way evidence was collected is another.

     
  • Kate 09:28 on 2017/03/20 Permalink | Reply  

    A woman passenger died Monday morning in a car crash on the highway in Sud-Ouest.

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel