I don't see it as a problem, even long term. I think children are allowed to seek comfort when they need it from their parents.
The only thing I would say is that because this isn't normal behavior, and started recently, you should have a talk with them about why they are feeling the need to sleep with you now. It could be an underlying issue or it could be that they are experiencing stressors in life they aren't able to cope with.
Either way, talking to them about it would be the best idea.
"The Government of Canada will not accept a bad deal," Carney said in French in Huntsville, Ont., Tuesday. "Our objective is not to reach a deal whatever it costs. We are pursuing a deal that will be in the best interest of Canadians."
When it comes to the prospect of reaching a deal, Carney said "we'll see" and that "complex negotiations" continue. He said if there isn't a deal that works for Canada, his government will "take stock" and consider what to do next.
This doesn't sound like what you are describing, and seems firm considering how dangerous of a situation this is.
"I've had over 80 bilaterals with world leaders since I became prime minister. A number of the premiers have been on major trade missions. We have other things to do," he said.
This sounds like the Government has other plans for when Trump talks fall through. Which has been being worked on over the last few months. From trade to arms procurement there is a lot of diversification efforts happening across governments.
There is a lot going on and the focus doesn't really seem to be getting something from the US anytime soon.
I would argue this time Carney’s comment is a worthless plattitude. You can sign anything and claim it was the best deal for Canada.
What does a good deal for Canada look like to you?
What supports your argument?
You could look at him removing the digital services tax and negotiating with the US as anti-Canada things he’s done
Despite him saying he’s looking out for Canada
One could look at it like that, but I do not see why they would. Can you explain why one would see it that way?
What has he said he was going to do that he hasn't done yet?
I didn't realize this was a thing for me until now, but that sentence grinds all of my gears, and I hate it.
Fair point!
If the end goal is moving to Idiocracy, I do not remember exactly the episode but I do remember Beavis and Butthead met people who were dumber than them, which was the whole episode, and the humour felt a lot like what Idiocracy was as a whole.
It has been a long time since I saw the show so hopefully you know what I am talking about, and that I am not misremembering it. haha
This seems like a circular argument to me.
The area doesn't have the infrastructure to handle the workers needed to build it, but we need to build infrastructure to solve the problem, but we cannot do that because we don't have the infrastructure built to support the workers.
Unfortunately that means updating infrastructure is likely going to cause pain and strain, and doesn't seem like a good argument against building these things.
If I am being honest I do not think Gen Z'ers as a whole would appreciate that kind of humour based on my experience with people in that age group. Obviously not a universal rule, but that kind of humour doesn't seem very relevant to newer generations.
Carney didn’t run with this in the platform, no Canadians were consulted on this.
Carney absolutely ran on a platform of Canadian industry independence, and building infrastructure to that end as quickly as possible. If anyone didn't see a bill like C-5 coming as a means to that end, one was not paying attention.
The harm of failing to consult on such a rushed piece of legislation is the harm.
Then I would argue that no harm was caused because bills pass regularly without further consultation from the public. This happens because we elect people to draft, vote on, and pass legislation.
Just think what PP would do with these powers?
Even if we believe Carney will act honouably, this legislation opens the door to all sorts of damage in the name of “projects of national interest” for all federal gov’t’s to come.
Fear mongering helps no one, and is not a valid argument against the legislation.
The Tribes bringing this ridiculous lawsuit to the courts is a waste of time and resources as no damage has been caused by the passing of this bill, and it is absolutely insulting to the idea of truth and reconciliation that they demand $100 million for not asking to pass the bill first to "set an example".
If they do not like how the Canadian Government is doing things they have a legal right to self determination and Governance.
I generally try to default to neutral terms. There is no need to get this triggered over my choice to use neutral pronouns.