CdnFox

Bro, don't pretend people are upset with you just because you're wrong and they successfully point that out. I can't help your complete misunderstanding of history. All i can do is correct you when you're wrong. You should be thanking me, not getting upset. If you read a little more i woudln't have to help you out. But next time if you don't know the answers just ask, i'm happy to explain the actual facts as they actually occurred to prevent you being wrong in the future.

Sure - liberals have often had great success with lying. The east loves itself a good liar. It's practically a prerequisite. And of course the PC picked a fight with the west, who decided to start another party which esentially ended any threat to the Liberals for quite some time. As soon as that got settled tho... powdie. Harper did a huge amount. In fact some of the most radical new ideas came during his time, tho they were often downplayed. His handling of the recession was brilliant. Of course he had a minority for most of his time, and no deal with the ndp to prop him up, but he still got a craptonne done and did it without cutting payments to the provinces. LOL - so much so that even the ndp thinks it's the liberals now Not so much on the 'endless domination' thing i suspect. Two full terms worth of time in office is about normal. Historically the liberals did better than that but it looks like those days are pretty much over. Justin will probably be gone next election. And PP will probably get two terms out it before he has to go. possibly more.

He didn't. He knows you're right, so he's got to create a fake argument that he thinks he can win. He doesn't think he can argue against the actual point you made.

Nope. THey cut FUNDING to the PROVINCES for it - but the actual costs remained. THey just said someone else should pay for it. That's not 'cutting the cost", that's just passing the bill. Nope. THey knew he hadn't. In fact- that's what they ran on. THey literally ran on the idea that the PC were going TOO FAR on fiscal restraint. The GST? Unfair! We'll get rid of that! Trade with america? No way - we'll scrap that. We don't need those things! We don't need fiscal restraint!!! THey get in - guess what gets kept.

Really. And how did they do that. By bringing in the GST, one of the major contributors to wiping out the deficit? ER,... no, they campaigned against that. They promised to scrap it. They lied, and kept it because that was one of the best ways to deal with the deficit. By lowering interest rates? No - that was done by mulroney after trudeau racked it up. They fell from about 20 percent down to about 5 percent. So they didn't do that. By singing a trade deal with the US that greatly benefitted us? NNNNOoooppe! Again that was mulrioney, again they campained on scrapping it, again they kept it because it was doing the job. By seriously slashing EI benefits and then stealing 70 BILLION dollars from the EI fund which paid for every single one of their surpluses? Yep. that money is literally more than all their surpluses combined. That was not 'tax' money, that was insurance money but they just went ahead and stole it. AND they downloaded a bunch of costs to the provinces. So the provinces went into debt instead of the feds. But there's only one taxpayer - so while it LOOKED good it was actually trash. So they did NOTHING except just stick to the plan that the PC had already started.

It isn't. And as someone who has to deal with this quite a bit i'm here to tell you it's not going to be easy or fast or cheap to eventually do it. Sorry. it's one thing for a small percent of the segment to have EV's, but it would be a massive massive undertaking to make it so everyone could in the very near future.

True, that is the key. It's all about the batteries (or generator) in the future for sure. That's what will make them practical for all.

You may not have said it or meant it but yet it's largely true. This is a VERY convenient war for the us and allies. Putin was completely retarded to start it. Without wasting a single allied life, the russians are being severely depleted militarily and will be years building back up to where they were before, if they can at all. THat's pretty convenient. As you say, the allies get to get rid of aging weapons systems AND they get to test them in real combat doing so, so they can learn how to make the next ones better and even more effective. They get to see how they can be used effectively in the field. That's VERY convenient. You can't pay for that kind of testing . The russians are losing credibility globally which will help the US negotiating in foreign areas such as the middle east. That's convenient as well. This whole thing comes with a package price of a few billion a year - which is NOTHING. The US's defense budget is about 819 billion dollars when it's at peace! Fighting a war and running your enemy into the ground for a few billion dollars is a super mega bargain! That's not just convenient, it's frugal! And of course unless russia manages to take all of the ukraine, from now on whatever is left of it will be solidly in the US's corner and control, so the russians have basically handed a major military and economic asset to the US. The US won't even have to let them join nato to get fully miliary access to the country moving forward. Ukraine sold itself to the us for the arms it needed. Meanwhile the Russains are selling themselves - to china. Who is going to be a MUCH less pleasant overlord

If they were to have won against the ukraine, undeniably. That's why it's in the best interests of the US and nato to keep supporting the Ukraine. It would appear the opponents of that have to lie and take statements out of context to make their point. My rule is that if you have to lie to make a point, you probably don't have a very good point. Obviously those opposed to supporting ukraine don't have a very good point.

Yes he was. Every prime minster runs up the largest debt in history - the costs of things go up and the number of people go up. However - mulroney ran mostly structural surpluses. Meaning what he brought in for revenue was greater than what he put out in expenses. But - he couldn't deal with that debt. Remember he STARTED with the largest debt in our history. And that debt was clocking in at closer to 20 percent interest. That was to fight the runaway inflation of the time due to trudeau's massive borrowing. There was no way to service that debt. So he did all he could to reasonably cut expenses, the negotiated the free trade agreement and they brought in the GST as a specific deficit killer. And they continued on their way to forcing down inflation and interest rates. It is a complete lie of epic and biblical proportions to suggest they weren't concerned about the debt. That's ALL they worked on for the most part. No, it was a crisis before then. And not one of mulroney's making. COMPLETE swing and a miss there. You are way off base with your recolleciton of those events.

Bitcoin is perfectly fine, that got twisted by the media all out of shape. But there really is no difference between bitcoin and the stock market. Name one critisizm of the one that doesn't apply to the other. OTHER than crypto isn't officially regulated, which is all that PP proposed. And supporting the convoy's right to protest is fine. As it turns out a lot of people changed their tune on that. And nobody is going to say "ohhhh i love his economics and i do want a house and less red tape and stuff would be great and i know he'll deliver that but... man, he DID say that he supports the convoy's right to protest and that any individual who breaks the law should go to jail. Nobody likes how justin managed that so it's not like he can hold it up as an example. There's nothing "radicaly right wing' about allowing peaceful protest. There's nothing radically right wing about supporting crypto currency regulation. They fail but they do not fail badly. Harper didn't fail badly. But chretien got thrown out by his own people, and his successor was destroyed by an upstart party that just got created at the polls, sinking the libs into a decade of being in a political backwater despite the fact they were the natural ruling party for decades. He failed BADLY. And none are proposing to do so. The fact that this is even a comment being made is more proof of how the left wing media can lead people by the nose. Economically PP has been about identical to harper in his proposals, arguably slightly LEFT of him. Yet he's painted as a 'right wing radical'. The people of Canada better wake up. Because if they keep turning away moderate candidates then sooner or later a TRULY radical one will get in and they'll regret that. Or the country will just collapse like greece.

Sure, and that's a good start. But it still is charged on the trucks that haul the stuff to the processing plant the processing plant, and probably on their electricity. etc etc etc. But yeah - cut the costs of food production and distribution down. That's a good start. Make it easier for people to grow. That's a good start. etc etc. You have to think as a gov't "How do we make it easier for farmers and food producers to do what they want to do and make food". And if you're going to be bringing in 500,000 thousand new mouths to feed every year you need to think how they're going to ramp up for that as well.

I think you got that backwards - i think he was saying the area was liberal because the bums and criminals were there, not that they were there because it was liberal. Although certainly it doesn't hurt that these areas are more liberal. In more conservative areas they may be tolerated less.

It's a fair hunk of it. Again as you mention it's something that affects ALL the stops on the supply chain - it affects growing the food, harvesting the food, shipping the food to the processors, processing the food, shipping it to the stores and the costs of the energy to keep it fresh once it's there. There's carbon tax on all of that. I believe the current carbon tax has been found to be responsible for something like a half percent or more of the current overall inflation - that's actually a fair bit. Doubling the subsidies doesn't help in an inflationary situation. Pouring more unearned money into the economy just drives inflation up. That's largely how we got into this mess. At the end of the day the only things that beat inflation are reducing demand or increasing availability of product. That's it. And we're not likely to deal with the first one unless trudeau is willing to slow down the number of people coming into the country until things stabilize. So they have to look at how to take some of the red tape and costs out of production and supply (and make sure the savings get passed on). And they may have to slow immigration till that catches up, 400,000 extra mouths to feed every year puts a LOT of strain on that system and keeps prices high.

Sure. me too. And for others it isn't and they buy EV's which is good because it does encourage the industry to keep advancing and coming out with better products.

No, that's not why they raised interest rates. And that wouldn't be very smart of them to do - the demand for housing would remain the same. There's the same number of people. So if people can't afford houses then there's more renters and rents go up. Which is precisely what's been happening. It tends to affect how much groceries they buy, and how much food restaurants buy. And some types of groceries more than others. I get what your'e saying - it's not direct. But - if I have to spend more on my mortgage, i've got less to spend on food. If i have to pay more for fuel, same thing. So raising the interest rates affects consumer spending across the board, even if it's not directly. And that SHOULD have SOME impact on food prices but so far not so much. which is in and of itself concerning.

Well you got the first part right anyway.

Why. If you're a two person two car family why wouldn't it make sense to have one of each if you're in that profile where an EV is a better choice 90 percent of the time. I actually know people like that, they are able to use the vehicle that makes the most sense the vast majority of the time and feel they benefit from it financially. I swear Boges just wants them to be awesome and near perfect for everyone and you just want them to be terrible and the worst choice for everyone. If you two had a kid we'd probably get a little closer to reality If the infrastructure was in place they'd probably be a very good option for about 40 - 50 percent of people. maybe a hair more, in a province like bc with cheap electricity. The infrastructure isn't in place and even 50 percent wouldn't justify banning the sale of ICE vehicles like trudeau wants, but it'll slowly move forward. At some time the tech will catch up. It's a natural progression.

Yes, thank goodness we're only hurting ours..... hey, wait a minute.... No, thankfully we do have the vote. If we can just convince ontario that corruption, abuse of authority and selling the country out to foreign powers is a BAD thing.

Yeah - where have we seen THAT kind of thinking fail spectacularly recently Speaking of - hear justin' s looking to appoint a first nations person as head of the RCMP regardless of experience. That should work out as well as all his other political appointments.

Well very true about the housing impact - people think housing prices have come down but really the cost of buying a home for anyone who has to take a mortgage has gotten worse. A 20 percent drop in housing prices (from the super high peak) doesn't make up for a 400 percent increase in mortgage rates. But the whole 'interest rate' thing wasn't just about housing. It's been billed as an 'inflation fighting' tool. But it's not really reducing the inflation on food. Or much else if we're being honest. And that's what the article is pointing to.

That's the same regardless of vehicle. I'm sure you're not suggesting EV's don't have windshield wipers Well that's what insurance is for. And that's why it costs so much. Whereas electricity is pretty cheap, depending where you live. But it's like i said - depends on the variables. Many can't change their own oil. On the other hand some places electricity is very expensive. Compare BC for example to chicago or detriot - electricity is a quarter of the price in bc - and gas is about 1/3 the price in those places. So - for someone living in bc who's got a predictable regular daily commute and the ability to charge at home, living in one of the major metros where gas tax is through the roof and it's 1.80 a litre and not likely to go down.... well suddenly that might be a pretty big money saver. For a while there all i had was my truck which is good on gas for a TRUCK - and i had to go into work which is a fairly long ways away. I was spending upwards of 600 bucks a month on gas. Dropping that to 50 bucks in electricity or less leaves a lot of room for savings. Now i almost never go into the office, i'm spending about 50- 100 dollars a month in gas, That's even tho gas has gone up. So - NOW is it worth it? Well probably not. I just don't think you can make blanket statements about it being the best choice for everyone or a horrible idea for everyone. It just really depends.

Well that's arguably true, but i think they would say the environmental savings is the fuel consumption, lack of oil changes, etc. rather than the disposal of the vehicle at end of useful life. Well i tend to agree but for some people it is a real savings and there's reasons for ev's beyond just the environment, and i do support people having choices as consumers. So if someone thinks it's a benefit to their particular circumstance then i say fill yer boots. I think arguing that it's never a good idea is probably as hard to defend as saying its always a good idea. oh i'm pretty sure most of the manufacturers will keep a few ice models around

Well that wasn't very truthful was it. Putin has rattled his nuclear saber MANY times in the past and in fact did so in this crisis before anyone helped. Pulling out of the treaty is largely meaningless. There is zero evidence the US blew up any pipelines. So if we're being 'honest' - nothing has significantly changed. Russia still has more than enough nukes to toast the planet, treaty or no, and other than that it's the same as its always been. Well you'd have to be about 7 different kinds of dense to think that i said that. As i was clear many times, given the pounding he's taken over Ukraine it's unlikely he will be planning ANY military adventures for a long time. This has moved us AWAY from more risky conflicts. Dude - putin did NOT drive his forces into those regions and attempt to save them. He drove his forces straight at the heart of Ukraine and tried to take the entire country. So lets be crystal clear -this had ZERO to do with helping the poor people of the donbas escape repression. This had EVERYTHING to do with attempting to add Ukraine to russia by way of military adventure and conquest. Period. Anything else could have been negotiated. It wasn't. There is NO redeeming feature here - putin chose to invade for no other reason than he wanted the territory and resources and every death is his fault directly. You sound like those people who try to say we shoudln't lock up muderers and rapists because they had a hard life so it's not their fault. It's their fault. The depletion of the russian conventional forces to the point where they are no longer a threat and sending the very cear message to russia and china that if you partake in military adventure and conquest it might go very very badly for you, so maybe don't do that. Which is exaclty what they're getting. Russia's ability to project power beyond it's borders has been outrageously damaged, and their weapons stockpiles have been seriously depleted. It's a safe bet that if putin could rewind the clock he wouldn't have invaded. China gets the message and realizes that if they can't take tiawan in a day or three then those people will get enough arms to make it a very very bloody affair for the chinese that may not achieve what they want it to. And of course russia is taking a massive prestige hit worldwide. When "client states" are thinking about getting behind russia they're going to think twice. They're going to decide if they're getting russian gear and their opponents are getting nato gear, they may be at a disadvantage. And finally of course nato is getting someone to test out the effectiveness of their gear and develop new tactics for them for free. The next gen himars will be even more impressive and the tactics and lessons of this war will be integreated into the us plans and equipment making them even more effective. And all it cost them was a few billion which is nothing. All of which is why they won't have any problem continuing to fund this forever as long as public sentiment about the war continues. It's got squat to do with 'democracy' or that ukraine is such a great and noble and honest country blah blah.

I looked it up. Not toxic. Sorry little fella Nope. All inert for modern ones. The cobalt has been replaced with things like manganese or phospate. Strike two little guy Yes - it is very difficult to actually cite the voices in your head Lithium batteries are currently 100 percent recyclable. There's literally no problems with doing so anymore. For consumer electronics the problem is people just toss them, not that they can't be recycled. But nobody's going to just throw their tesla in the garbage can. They are standardized, tonnes of places recycle them. They will eventually be replaced by better tech but not for the reasons you state. Well yes and no. If battery tech improves or changes it should be pretty easy to convert a tesla over to the new battery tech when it's current batteries start to die. Even if the battery changes it's still putting out electricity. For example, i can replace my old disposable battery in my old flashlight for a new rechargable lithium one and get the benefits of more power and longer life without buying a new battery. Newer battery tech should be smaller and lighter. So there should be more than enough room in the vehicle for it when the day comes to upgrade. it's not like replacing an engine. That wasn't your worst post little guy! tell your mom i said you could have an extra cookie in your luchbag for snacktime at recess