Leaderboard

The next decade promises to be the most disruptive one ever and Canada appears to be suffering a major lack of creativity. One major party thinks we can build our future on 20th century energy and the other would like to take us back to 19th century labor conditions. Meanwhile, there are a number of mega-trends that will be painful for some of our core industries. Paris Agreement or not, the fossil fuel industry is a dead man walking. In the US, wind energy has recently dropped to $.02/KwH and solar is reportedly heading toward $.01 within the next few years. Wind and solar isn't just the cleanest new energy, it's now the cheapest as well. Yes, there is the intermittency problem but as battery and other grid storage technologies improve, this will be overcome. As batteries improve, the electric car will kill off the internal combustion engine (price parity for electric cars is expected before 2025). If all of that isn't enough new IMO sulfur content regulations slated for 2020 will lower demand for high sulfur fuel (like tar sands sludge). Kind of makes you wonder why Albertans are getting their shorts in a knot over a pipeline. There will be no market. The auto industry (and related industries such as insurance, auto dealerships, retail mechanics body shops, etc) is in for a massive shakeup. EV's have vastly fewer moving parts than ICE vehicles and so will ultimately be more more reliable, last longer and require fewer repairs. But the auto industry pain only starts there. The real challenge will be from transportation-as-a-service (TAAS) companies using electric self driving vehicles. With no driver to pay for and operating costs a fraction of ICE vehicles, costs per Km will plummet and this model will challenge the model of private vehicle ownership. With drunk and distracted drivers removed from the equation, accident rates will plummet and with them, industries that depend on accidents (auto insurance, body shops) will be crushed. As families give up first their second vehicle and then abandon vehicle ownership entirely, the auto manufacturing industry will contract to a fraction of its former size. The meat industry is also going to go through major changes. Due to a variety of concerns (including health, global warming and ethical treatment of animals), consumers are increasingly looking for alternatives. At the same time, an alternative is emerging. Lab grown meat is still in its infancy and far too expensive to be a threat to the meat industry today. But as the technology progresses, it's just a matter of time before prices drop and it will become cheaper than conventional meat. This will free up millions of acres around the world currently dedicated to range land. It will also prevent a massive amount of methane, a potent greenhouse gas from being released into the air. These are only a few examples - there are lots of others. Fishing will be threatened due to warming and acidifying oceans. Forestry could be hit hard due to climate-related droughts (and accompanying massive forest fires). Employment will become increasingly precarious due to self driving vehicles and other types of artificial intelligence. As these and other disruptive changes will challenge Canada over the next 20-30 years, what are our two major parties obsessing over? Twentieth century fossil fuels and and trade agreements. And, in BC's case, a 20th century technology dam. We need better leadership.

The above is taken out of the article, and while it does not say with certainty that there are no, NON Muslims living there..... The article does suggest that very thing...Mr Ahmed is managing the selling the homes....and they are marketed exclusively to the Ahmadiyya community....."unless I misunderstood exclusively".....the homes do offer design changes that have their religion in mind....

Turkeys voting for early Christmas? I dont think so. Besides, I thought in Canada you changed the law so that parliamentary terms are almost always fixed. Perhaps I have misunderstood something.

I believe that Canada ranks as one of the most tolerant countries in the world, so I'm a bit puzzled as to why you think racism, apparently in general. "should" be called out in Canada? Where is the epidemic the left so clearly wishes to conjure? The Anglo-Western, Scandinavian and some Latin American countries rank as the most tolerant countries on earth and virtually all the most intolerant countries are in the developing world. Funny that, eh? Maybe we should be calling out the most intolerant countries for their racism and xenophobia. Nah, we're much too polite to do that. As the feckless Trudeau might say, they're evolving. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/15/a-fascinating-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-racially-tolerant-countries/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.852f7c313814

But this is even more of an unrealistic raving than solar/wind power replacing base load in the future. Population growth slows with education and economic growth.

Yes, I know.

This is not a complete accounting, but we know this much so far....which may or may not survive Canada's input this week: Mexico agrees to raise sourced parts content to a 75% vs. 62.5% of North American plants, which will have the impact of reducing Chinese and increasing U.S./Canada parts content (good for Canada); 40 to 45% of Mexican workers making vehicles must earn $16 per hour. Mexico agreed to eliminate Chapter 19 dispute process (bad for Canada) Mexico agreed to intellectual property and patent rules extension for U.S. pharma and other IP (bad for Canada) Mexico agreed to a 6 year NAFTA review cycle and 16 year cancellation if no agreement is reached Mexico will buy more U.S. ag and other products like corn to help offset the trade imbalance Mexico will raise its duty free limit to be more in line with the USA, putting pressure on Canada's paltry $20 The U.S. made some concessions based on Trump's hard-ball tariff and non-tariff threats: U.S. will review/remove steel/aluminum tariffs after NAFTA is passed U.S. will cap vehicles imported from Mexico at 2.4 million before tariffs kick in U.S. agreed to reduce Chapter 11 NAFTA challenges to only key industries https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/28/the-associated-press-details-of-the-preliminary-us-mexico-trade-deal-at-a-glance.html https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trade-nafta/u-s-mexico-reach-nafta-deal-pressure-turns-to-canada-idUSKCN1LC1E7

Trump is full of shit and the rest of the world knows it.

Something Canada will never, ever experience. Today, Canada is barely a weakling "middle power", even outfoxed by Mexico.

1.) Absolutely correct. I think the role of the Mulroney government in this fiasco is seldom fully acknowledged. Trudeau, if left to his own devices, will make the situation so much worse and the CPC apparently says little other than that they'll consult on the matter, which to many of us out here means they'll likely do little but tinker around the edges if they come to power. 2.) Of course, there are things that can be done. As a law professor who's written a couple articles on the matter, which have been published in the National Post, has argued, the Trudeau government is exaggerating Canada's obligations where the illegal/irregular migrants are concerned. It simply takes political will to properly address this. Trudeau's government doesn't have the kind of backbone and resolve required and I suspect Scheer's approach might be equally as anemic.

Germany population 87 million, has 27,000 reserves (about the same as Canada). Stories this year included that it had just 4 fighter aircraft that were in working order, and equipped with missiles. Less than half their 250 tanks are operational (Russia has 4500). None of their submarines work. France has only 32,000 reserves itself. Last year a report said 30% of its aircraft were operational. Finland, population 5.5 million has 900,000 reserves. By way of comparison. The Russians are starting a military exercise soon in western Russia, near NATO's borders, with 300,000 troops. I don't think they have any intention of crossing the border, but if they did, Germany could do nothing to stop them. They'd have the whole country conquered in the time needed to drive across it. Only mighty Poland stands in their way. LOL

The Europeans did not push very hard for such independence after Europe lay in self inflicted, post WW2 ruins either. The Marshall Plan was not funded by Europe. NATO was designed to "keep America in, Russia out, and Germany down". This did not change in 1991, and troubles would continue in Eastern Europe. The Europeans may say they want their own security system, but talk is cheap.