Quote:
Originally Posted by GullFoss
Kind of weird takes by angry people in this thread. I'm simply pointing out that changing the funding mechanism to a well funded operation probably has zero impact on the operations. The assumption being that it continues to be properly funded.
Can someone explain to me while Legal Aid Alberta - a non-profit largely funded by the government - has such a giant reserve? And why doesn't that large reserve suggest that perhaps the funding model needs to be revised? And why does a government looking into that get labeled poorly?
I don't really get it beyond the idea that people in this thread are super ideological and are just applying manufactured rage to the topic de jour.
|
An actual lawyer with actual experience gave actual information on what this means, and instead of reading it, your response is:
“kind of weird takes by angry people”
“I don’t really get it”
“people are super ideological and apply manufactured rage to the topic de jour”
Ever heard the phrase “you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink”?
You’re the horse. If you don’t get it, it’s because you didn’t even put in the minimum effort to get it while it was handed to you on a silver platter, and just instead decided to assume anyone you disagree with is angry and ideological.
It’s not hard to have a smarter take than what you’re offering. So give it a shot.