CdnFox

Why do you disagree with the industries dissatisfaction? Specifically the auto industry which is going to be severely harmed You keep neglecting to mention that I notice. It's almost like you want to avoid dealing with the truth

It's actually a quote from yes minister, the 90's british sitcom but sure

That is one of the dumbest analysis I have ever heard. He bears zero resemblance to poilievre at all. If anything he's closer to Maxine Bernier He's clearly not going to change the rhetoric, if anything he'll double down on it. Justin at no point in history ever was a reflection of the electorate. It was a snake oil peddler But I do love this: "Government must strive to be a reflection of the electorate" Basically what you're saying is "I am their leader! I must follow them!"

Well that's not very scientific is it

I think crack hoe is sort of conflating a couple of arguments There are some people in the past who have tried to make the argument that homosexuality isn't "natural". And others have commented that it occurs in nature in more than just humans therefore it must be natural. And to a degree that makes some sense. It does appear to be a naturally occurring phenomenon But she has gotten confused and is trying to conflate that with morality or acceptable human behavior. It occurs in nature therefore it must be morally acceptable to humans. That is insane, as you correctly point out murder rape and child molestation are all naturally occurring phenomenon. That doesn't make that behavior acceptable to humans who have a higher degree of intellectual capacity and the ability to choose. Well most of us do anyway, crackho possibly being the exception

Pot meet kettle. Kettle, pot.

Kid it is painfully obvious that you know you're wrong and you're avoiding further discussion because emotionally it's difficult for you to cope with. And we see this with a lot with people on the left. You emotionally invest in an answer, you try and logic your way back to a question, and that makes it easy to pick apart your argument which upsets you because you've emotionally invested in the answer even though it's wrong As I have demonstrated this deal hurts almost as many people as it allegedly helps, it offers no guarantees or protections for us while offering reasonable guarantees and protections for china, it doesn't give us anything we didn't have before whereas they get access to a whole new industry, it is demonstrably a bad deal. There's nothing you can really say to argue that of course because I'm right so instead you run around in circles claiming you just won't because that's not what discussion forums are for or something LOLOL Sorry that you're guy is a disappointment. But it's probably time you start learning to face the truth about things.

lOL i could actually hear bug's voice...

Sure, that's what i said right LOLOL Whenever you're wrong you try to lie your way back to a different argument Whether heterosexuality occurs in nature or not is not relevant to whether or not humans find it acceptable And i would remind you that MANY different groups find it UNACCEPTABLE much of the time. For example, heterosexuality with someone other than your spouse is considered horrible by many people. Heterosexual sex with a child is universally seen as evil. etc etc. So the issue is whether hetero or homosexual behavior is 'abhorrent' or the like to humans has nothing to do with its occurrence in nature. Your particular argument along those lines is simply not a valid argument.

I read your Op just fine. And In fact I've mentioned literally hundreds of regulations. They're all enabled by the acts I mentioned You just feel that if you lie about it you can feel better about the fact that you're wrong I would get rid of those two acts in there attending regulations and move back to what we had prior to thatthat is a perfectly legitimate answer. But because you know you're wrong and that what you have said is stupid you're trying desperately to pretend that I didn't answer because the answer makes you look stupid Which is actually an answer to your question Now go and change your diapers

Good thing I didn't then But I see that regardless of who was speaking you can't cope with the comments or refute them. I agree. He says you're wrong by the way I note What are you talking about, nobody asked you to speak.

well the 'slaves' certainly were. They hadn't been around for 3 decades as per your own link And again, canada never had slaves. What i said was quite accurate. A new country, that's for sure. See, that's the funny thing. When a country comes into existence, that's when the country comes into existence. There were no slaves in canada, and there hadn't been any in the lands that would become canada for many decades before. No magic or aliens needed Prior to that the colonies were english french and first nations. Those countries/groups did have slavery at times, but they are not Canada any more than america is the same as england. And to top it off, almost all the slaves were slaves brought in from somewhere else. Generally people werne't allowed to be bought or sold but if someone showed up with a slave they were allowed to keep them. Not quite the same thing as 'having slavery'. And the first nations were forced to stop slavery as well. LOL sorry kid, you were wrong and i know how much you hate being wrong and i get you're trying desperately to twist the facts to seem less wrong, but honestly, you should know by now that while i'm not always right i generally don't open my mouth unless i'm pretty sure so you really need to double check your facts first. Slavery wasn't really slavery even before it was abolished in the lands that would become canada, not like we would think of it in the states, And even that was abolished long before Canada came into exsistance. With the exception of a bunch of former Americans living in nova scotia, the vast vast majority of people who had owned slaves were long dead by the time canada was formed Swing and a miss kiddo

I doubt either is true. I reailze it's very important to your personal sense of identity to hate trump and for him to be a bad person in all respects but the reality is the military people around him and many advisors aren't incompetent at all and the israelis DEFINITELY are not. I think that they believed they'd be able to more effectively suppress the current gov't and either trigger regime change or force a negotiation or something. Obviously i don't know precisely but they appear to have had some plan in mind and it doesn't seem to have gone off as well as they'd hoped. Unfortunately that's always the risk with war. Perhaps they'd hoped they could take out more of the leadership than they did or perhaps they had reason to believe insiders would take over and that failed, who knows. But it's pretty clear that they thought that by this stage they'd be down to a political situation rather than a military one and that obviously didn't pan out

I get where that title might be misleading, but Canada was founded in 1867. long after all slavery was abolished. So nope, no slaves in Canada, sorry. You need to remember a lot of the history the gov't sites put out is written by leftist who WANT to make the country sound horrible. Just like the left in the states insists that america really begain in 1619. But Canada never had legal slavery. Before canada there were some slaves but even that is misleading, for example upper canada (ontario) had a law that said a slave must be allowed to quit being a slave at any time So it was closer to a light version of indentured servitude more than slavery. Of course the first nations practiced slavery so if we're counting them then pre-canada had slaves, but that's still not canada. Canada never had slavery.

You don't comprehend anything. You're simply lying to try to make a point you can't make with the truth. I didn't actually excuse anything. Show me where i excused anything Irrelevant. Both are common in nature. So saying one is acceptable because it occurs in nature can't be a valid argument unless they all are. And they are not. No, it's just you demonstrating you're a lying sack of crap who drinks too much. But thanks for playing

Canada didn't.

You mean when i proved your point wrong, you got upset and wanted to take your ball and go home. You WERE the one who brought up examples, now you're butthurt i did the same? Gotcha. I read just fine. Sorry to hear that your cult isn't living up to your expectations and now your buthurt about it But as I showed you wrong. Which is why you're running away crying now

And even THEN the province occasionally decides that it's "not fair" to charge the cost of living rate and holds it below that even tho landlords are stuck with the increased costs. Also Carney, whom Barq'er adores, was the renoviction king for brookfield. Yet somehow he still likes him

Humans do. Sometimes religion is involved No not really. That's not what I did in the slightest. Once again you prove that your ability to comprehend basic concepts is slightly less than that of a preschooler. Try again you drunk twat.

So we got nothing. Well thanks for at least admitting it . IF they'd come away with a trade deal then perhaps sacrificing our auto sector might have been worth something. The problem with that is once we let the ev's into the market, we have to support them. Politically you can't say "no more ev parts for the ev you just bought mr voter". We DID guarantee that a certain number would be allowed in essentially tariff free and we have to stick to that commitment. Once that's done it's very hard to start imposing tariffs again. And that's just round one, the longer this goes on the more impossible it gets. they know that. Pay attention. I'll go slow. They have never been allowed to sell their vehicles here. There are no chinese autos in canada. Some companies have vehicles they MADE in china sold here but evne that is very rare (tesla) and we deliberately have prevented allowing them into the north american market. Now, they threatened us with canola tariffs something we've been selling to them for ages. To get them to give us back what we already had they demanded access to something they've NEVER had, our auto market and all those auto jobs. Which we gave them. And we got NO promises they wouldn't just put the tariffs back on. That is a BAD deal. Period. It helped some farmers a little, it trashed the auto industry a lot. And we won't get that auto industry back, but the farmers might just get their canola tariffs back at any time.

He was, you weren't Carney said there was, Carney hired a buddy of his for a million dollars a year to speed that up. Yes you do I live rent free in your head so bad you can't talk t ANYONE else without mentioning me That's funny! That would be more believable if you didn't constantly get your facts wrong. And what you tend to default to is the left is always right. No matter how blatantly it obvious it is that the left has done something inappropriate you will stand up for it and demand that it was the best thing that anybody ever did anywhere ever

So now it's HIS fault you can't get F'd?!?! (BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! LOL sorry sorry, it was just there and i couldn't help myself. i'll go to my corner now....)

Less than nothing according to the auto sector Doug Ford slams Canada’s 'lopsided' new EV deal with China | CBC News Auto sector urges ‘Team Canada’ approach after China EV trade deal; ‘We are in the fight of our lives’ – CTVNews So basically we helped one industry and sold out another. And we gave them access to an industry that they never had before That's a net bad deal for us. While I'm sure the people that benefited are happy with it the people that are hurt by it are exactly the opposite. But overall for Canada it's a bad deal Which means they get permanent access to our industry no matter what. Well it's technically possible to kick them out the reality is is they won't be able to. But they could still slap tariffs on our canola with no problem And those aren't Chinese cars those are North American and European cars made in china which is not the same thing. It's a bad deal because it's a bad deal. It's objectively a bad deal. I can point to the parts of it that are bad and explain in detail why they're bad. It gives them something they've never had and doesn't even get back everything we used to have and they can use it as a knife to our throat anytime they want to in the future but we're going to be stuck with their cars Attempting to dismiss it is just because it's a liberal deal as childish You've already admitted that we got nothing for it, we got a little bit of relief for some farmers and some fishermen that we can't guarantee will even last through the summer and in exchange they got access to a market that's going to cause massive pain for the auto making sector This is just a bad deal. And if you cared about Canada and weren't such a liberal cultist even you would have to say this isn't a good deal

Canada gets by just fine without china if it has to. Let's put this in perspective. United states represents 78 percent of our trade. China is about 11. Europe is about 10. On the flip side china desperately needs our energy and other resources. We represented relatively small Source at the moment but a vital one and one they desperately want to expand because their other sources are limited We should not be giving them anything for free. We can expand trade with other partners and replace much of the trade that goes to china. Of course the real answer is "why not do both?" and that's correct. we should expand trade AND also trade with china .... but ONLY if the deal is worth it for us. This deal is not worth it, we should not be giving away entire markets for free

So we got nothing. Well thanks for at least admitting it . IF they'd come away with a trade deal then perhaps sacrificing our auto sector might have been worth something. The problem with that is once we let the ev's into the market, we have to support them. Politically you can't say "no more ev parts for the ev you just bought mr voter". We DID guarantee that a certain number would be allowed in essentially tariff free and we have to stick to that commitment. Once that's done it's very hard to start imposing tariffs again. And that's just round one, the longer this goes on the more impossible it gets. they know that. Pay attention. I'll go slow. They have never been allowed to sell their vehicles here. There are no chinese autos in canada. Some companies have vehicles they MADE in china sold here but evne that is very rare (tesla) and we deliberately have prevented allowing them into the north american market. Now, they threatened us with canola tariffs something we've been selling to them for ages. To get them to give us back what we already had they demanded access to something they've NEVER had, our auto market and all those auto jobs. Which we gave them. And we got NO promises they wouldn't just put the tariffs back on. That is a BAD deal. Period. It helped some farmers a little, it trashed the auto industry a lot. And we won't get that auto industry back, but the farmers might just get their canola tariffs back at any time. Truth is you can't even really call it a deal for us, it was just a deal for them and some vague promises for us