TASK DEFINITION: In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: toxic and non-toxic. Toxicity is defiend as anything that is rude, disrespectful, or unreasonable that would make someone want to leave a converation.
PROBLEM: Comment: So another American "tv preacher" is coming to Canada to fill his pockets with cash and breath fire and brimstone....   Christian my ass...  he has about as much to do with the ideas of Jesus as pigs can fly...

SOLUTION: Toxic

PROBLEM: Comment: Perhaps prisoners should have the choice of life imprisonment or the death penalty. Some might consider life in prison to be the more cruel and unusual punishment. In fact at some point  in the future I predict that a prisoner will request a medically-assisted death,  arguing that the depression associated with endless imprisonment is intolerable.  

It means nothing to me either way.

SOLUTION: Non-toxic

PROBLEM: Comment: Really?

No question, the Chinese masterfully figure out how to copy and build cheaper. Rarely, if ever, better.

As for vested interests in fossil fuels, that is a complete red herring. In the US, fossil fuels are not revered, nor are they feared. Entrepreneurs like Elon Musk do not demand the neutering of Big Oil - he is convinced that he will beat them at their own game. In zero sum Canada, in order for one industry to prosper, another must be choked off by government.

The US understands that when a fuel source is found that beats oil and gas in terms of price, portability and energy density, then it is hasta la vista Big Oil. Until then however, all's fair.

Unlike in Canada where we persist in the fiction of thinking we are eco-laggards in  a world which is rapidly weaning itself off of oil, despite the fact of increasing, not decreasing global demand.

Our nanny state will see us getting poorer, with a few pats on the head from the eco-screamers to keep us warm.

SOLUTION:
Non-toxic