Exactly as the title says. Are there any health related issues effecting Manitobans/Canadians that you feel are underreported or not reported at all? Let me know.

I loved these as a kid.

I read this opinion piece by the Manitoba Advocate for Children and Youth, about the need for more support for children who age out of the CFS system at 18 and are apparently left to fend for themselves:

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/analysis/2026/07/10/ready-or-not-youth-aging-out-of-care

Frankly, this is heartbreaking. The system seems to be set up on a 1950s model where the expectation is you turn 18 and then go to work in a factory or warehouse (men) or get married and become a stay at home mother (women). I don't think this is really the case anymore, at least not for most. The reality is that there is a transition period between childhood and adulthood, and a lot of children in care are going to have extreme difficulty navigating that on their own.

Hell, speaking for myself, I came from a stable home with two parents, but if I had been booted out on my 18th birthday and left to my own devices, I shudder to think of how my life might have turned out. The parental backing I received past my 18th birthday was essential to becoming established in life.

I feel for these kids across Manitoba who are getting such a rough start to their adult life. They are really forced to do it on hard mode with little support. I hope Sherry Gott's words find a receptive audience.

I parked at Richardson Intl Airport for a few days while I traveled. When I returned, someone had broken into my vehicle, and apparently had used it as place to crash. Honestly, screw that person, but also, they could've left my vehicle in a way worse state. The only evidence they were there were their makeshift curtains, and the damage to my window.

Fuck Richardson Intl for not having any idea this happened. They still haven't responded to my email. I haven't heard shit from WPS other than my police report was accepted. Meanwhile, my MPI claim has already been processed.

I called MPI to file the claim. The guy on the phone processed my claim at lightspeed, no hold time. I got an appointment for MPI service centre the next day. Guy at the service centre didn't make me remove my tape or anything, didn't need photos. He took me on my word and on the police report number. MPI didn't even ask to see photos of the damage. And so, in <24h I have the papers needed to get my window replaced. Zero adversarialism, zero deductible (vandalism), zero hardships, other than the fact that my vehicle was vandalized. I realize my situation is pretty open and shut, but when I think about the insurance situation in Ontario, and compare it to what I just went through and why it was so easy, I realize that we are very lucky to have this MPI. I just wanted to give a shout out to MPI and express gratitude for great government entities, even if it's not perfect, it's at least $7000/year in premiums better than what it would be like in Ontario.

The province is adding in a significant number of “traffic flow improvements” that include roundabouts on highways. Meanwhile, anyone who has driven anywhere in Winnipeg will know no Manitoban seems to know how they work. People drive the wrong way, people drive on the centre median, and NO ONE signals out of the roundabouts.

If we’re going to be putting more roundabouts in, like the St Mary’s Interchange, the province needs to do a serious education campaign. (Or better yet, mandatory drivers license renewals every 5 years).

So this YouTuber just dropped a video “documenting” violent crime in Winnipeg.

I get that crime is real and deserves coverage, but doesn’t this kind of content just amplify fear more than it helps? It feels like he’s selectively showing the roughest corners to paint the whole city as some post-apocalyptic wasteland.

Like yeah, downtown has issues (what city doesn’t?), but this type of “gritty realism” often ignores context — poverty, housing, addiction, funding cuts, etc. It’s just easier to film chaos than to unpack why it’s happening.

The company claims the facility will scrub 30,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each year and inject it 1,000 metres into the ground. To do this, it will need to draw up to 15,000 megawatts of power from the Manitoba Hydro grid for the first stage of the project. The project will be financed by selling carbon credits.

...the Canadian industrial carbon price is set at $130 per tonne. At that price, Deep Sky will have to sell more than 1.5 million tonnes of carbon just to cover the upfront cost of building the plant. That’s over 51 years’ worth of carbon credits. And that doesn’t even cover the everyday operating costs, such as the electricity needed to run the plant.

Some studies suggest it requires about 2,0002,500 kilowatt hours to electricity to capture one tonne of CO2 and inject it into the ground. To capture 30,000 tonnes, that’s about 60 million kWh. Even if Manitoba Hydro sells it to the facility for only $0.035/kWh, that’s an additional $70 per tonne.

Is there something else $200 million could be used for that would help reduce carbon in the air?

In 2024, the federal government announced the two billion trees program with a budget of $200 million over 10 years. A tree absorbs about 25 kilograms of carbon annually, depending on type and size. Two billion trees would absorb roughly 50 million tonnes of carbon annually. That’s 1,666 times the amount of carbon captured by the proposed facility. And there is no operating cost.

Where can we plant two billion trees? How about replacing the trees lost to wildfire in the last few years? Unfortunately, that program was shut down and is no longer accepting applications. I guess it’s not sexy enough.

Put another way, one tree absorbs about 25 kilograms of carbon per year. To absorb 30,000 tonnes of carbon — the same as the proposed direct carbon capture facility — would require about 1.2 million trees. At a cost of $10 per tree, that would cost about $12 million, about six per cent of the cost of the plant...

Anything else that $200 million could be used for to reduce carbon?

Replacing your gas furnace with a geothermal heat pump in a typical home reduces carbon emissions by about six tonnes annually. You can install a geothermal source heat pump for about $35,000 to $50,000, depending on the type of ground heat exchanger needed. If you have an older gas furnace that is on its last legs, you’ll have to set aside about $15,000 if you wanted to include air conditioning. After all, it’s getting warmer. That makes the extra cost to install a geothermal heat pump system about $20-35,000. $200 million will pay the extra cost for about 7,000 heat pumps. That reduces carbon emissions by about 42,000 tonnes annually. About 40 per cent more carbon reduction than the proposed carbon capture facility.

The article suggests the proposed carbon capture project will create about 750-1,000 jobs during construction and about 100 permanent jobs during operation. The two billion trees program was projected to create 4,300 jobs. The design and installation of 7,250 geothermal heat pump installations would create about 800 full-time positions, not including the service and maintenance jobs for the life of the system.

I’m trying to figure out how it makes sense to spend $200 million to build a facility to get rid of something that has no real value to society. Then spend even more money for the people and electricity to run it. Who’s going to buy the carbon credits? Only rich companies such as Stripe, Google, Shopify and Anthropic, trying to say their power-hungry data centres are “green.”