Sure but you might try some of the other shows in similar style to the other ones you mentioned.

Buy Canadian means yeah, trying some different things, making small changes etc. Maybe, trying a new cop/detective show or another sitcom, or watching the first few seasons of the Expanse on Gem and sailing the high seas for the last two.

Also, for what it’s worth, an awesome no budget sci fi movie, Freaks is on Crave. Fully recommend going in knowing as little as possible.

Tuesdays! They are the first of three days in a row of soccer at night and a day and a half of classes (and only a day and a half of work, instead of 3 days of work.)

Reminds me of the celebrity jeopardy bit:

“Colours that end in ‘urple’.”

“What is ‘light urple?’”

Yup. I don’t think you can fault CBC gem for not, I dunno, pirating a prime “original” series. (Prime bought the rights once the sci fi channel or whatever it was called cancelled it.)

The first three seasons of the expanse are on CBC Gem.

I don’t watch many police/med procedurals (or much of what you’ve listed) but they seem to have a few procedurals etc, I think Republic of Doyle is one? Oh, Luther is a detective series and solid stuff, not sure if that scratches your itch? A couple others I don’t know much about… Kind of different and I do love Natasha Lyon so I’m biased but Pokerface seems like a fun take on the procedural.

Mr D is a sitcom, seems on par with Big Bang? Also, they have Portlandia which is sketch comedy but hilarious.

Might be a but highbrow but Reservation Dogs is great stuff.

To each their own though, good luck!

What sort of non sports shows do you usually enjoy?

What a bizarre piece of financial planning. Do you think kids are less expensive than saving for retirement?

And yes, there are high quality nursing homes. Especially if I’m willing to pay a fraction of what a child costs?

And the fact that he motivation is as a retirement plan, goddamn does that feel selfish and presumptive.

Ha, forgot about this until I realize I’d put off my ethical warm sock problem to this fall. (If you do buy ethical, you know how frustrating the very basics are.)

It’s the internet, anyone can lie but I’ve been living an increasingly ethical life for about a quarter century after reading No Logo as an angsty teen.

I think our big disagreement here may be what we consider “doing something.” I personally think “raising awareness” is just an excuse to not actually do any of the work or make any of the sacrifices a cause requires. Similarly, for many it seems “doing politics” isn’t actually the doorknocking, phone banking, signature getting etc but instead is mostly being insufferable online (which frankly, feels pretty counterproductive but that’s a whole different kettle of fish) and maybe loudly boycotting a marginal brand/comedian/etc whom they didn’t really like in the first place. (Boycotts of stuff we actually like… Well, I remember when all the radio stations and bars said they would never play Michael Jackson again. That didn’t last.)

But hey, maybe you aren’t buying from some of the worst places, so that’s nice, though your original statements didn’t at all make that clear, and in fact the first “but you participate in society” reallyade it seem like you don’t see a way to participate in society while mostly avoiding sweatshops… Anyway, keep boycotting fast fashion, even if fast fashion has mostly been couched in environmental terms because that’s a cause spoiled first worlders know affects us…

Ha, Sunshine blocked me as we disagree on proportional representation. As such, my Canada etc feeds are much quieter.

Cest la vie I suppose.

Admittedly, you only really get the craving for heroin or crack after, not before…

A nursing home.

My one grandma lived with my aunt in her later years and both parties clearly hated it.

But beyond that, holy shit does it seem crazy to have kids as a goddamn retirement plan.

Yes. It’s the fediverse, it’s tiny and people are just trying to contribute.

Whreeti live, a lot of stores hire cashiers with disabilities (there are tax benefits etc.) So I always go to the cashiers to support those programs.

What on Earth? Is your position actually “because people use the term fast fashion” it means people very much have an opinion they simply refuse to act on?"

I’m not in any way sure what point you’re trying to make.

It’s like saying that despite hosting a pig roast most years and BBQ meat all the time, I actually support vegetarianism because sometimes I note that boy, there’s a lot of cruelty in the production of my food.

Having an opinion and not acting on it doesn’t count for anything.

Edit: At least in the comic, the person is honest. Your approach seems to be “well, as long as I occasionally complain, I’ve done my duty!” I am sure the children who occasionally burn to death making your clothes take great comfort as they asphyxiate because you sometimes feel bad. Not bad enough to change your habits or anything but come on, what are we to do? Wear out of date clothes? UGH!

That’s a really good point. I rareiy check on the actual instance (tend to browse by all, the fediverse being so small…)

I’ve wondered about something like r/moderatepolitics …

Often times I’ll post a fairly moderate/mainstream response to a post, get a wild amount of upvotes but then most of the comments are angrily opposed. So I do wonder if there’s a vast pool of “normies” who may not engage simply because they are tired of being yelled at. (I have to admit, it gets disheartening. But, as I wish more people were bringing moderate/normal/reality to the Right, I feel obliged to do so here.)

Not sure how you could or if you’d even want to stop the random angry .ml folks from popping in and yelling but…

Edit: An example, https://piefed.ca/post/967518#comment_6353503

My comment is the most upvoted but most of the responses are strenuously opposed. (Sometimes, comically so.)

You don’t know that you’re allowed to sit out immoral trends, like fast fashion? Or is being trendy more important than what’s right?

You uhh, don’t think you can participate in society using fewer sweatshop endorsed clothes? Like thrift stores don’t exist or?

Estimates seem to vary but I’ve found a good few at 3 billion total from the wealthiest 200 Californians.

Also, given the article noted that:

Departing billionaires slashed projected one-time revenue from $100 billion to $40 billion, with Page and Brin’s exits alone costing California $26.7 billion.

That implies the current tax revenue from billionaires would drop 60 or so percent. So, presumably tax revenue drops from 3 to 1.2 billion, just based on current flights (and ignoring knock on effects.)

So, no one else leaves and we don’t count knock on effects, I’d guess it’d take ~ 21 or so years before this starts cutting. But, of course, knock on effects (folks decamp to say, Texas which seems to be snagging as many once Californian businesses as possible…) It’s going to be a very interesting, depressing experiment. (Really feels like a race to the bottom but that’s the America we know and,uhhh, love?)

The billionaires are spending mad money to fight this tax.

Mad for regular people money. From what I’ve read, what they’ve spent is a small fraction of what said tax would cost them (though if you’ve seen different, I love new info!)

A person is easy to move, a warehouse less so.

These folks don’t usually have warehouses, but whatever, say physical infrastructure. All that can stay, the boss can roll out, rock in Texas and take their private jet to and fro as needed. (Or, do their stuff remotely. I doubt Thiel is walking through cubicles etc.)

The worst case scenario for California of the mythical “Wealth Flight” is a bunch of parasites moving elsewhere.

The worst case is that the tax revenue that those billionaires bring (which sure, in a moral vacuum should probably be higher) goes elsewhere leaving California needing to plug the fiscal gap by taxing less wealthy folks or eliminating/reducing services.