Icebound

Oh, okay. And here, I thought that Canada would improve its greatness if... ...we spent more money on infrastructure, build better roads and high-speed rail to reduce the number of trucks on the highways. Maybe a pharmacare program, especially for those catastrophic illnesses where the drugs cost thousands per month. Make sure all its treaties are applied and enforced; make sure that everybody has clean water and food. Eliminate homelessness. Get rid of unwanted bigots. All that would be a start. don't you think?

Why is Canada not great? What, specifically, will improve its greatness?

Yes, they can. To their economic peril, of course. Not to mention the damage to their moral reputation. But do we really believe that a truly dedicated terrorist cannot get into the country if he really wanted to... even with this ban... ?

Care to include the stats on how many civilians killed since 9-11 by western-led forces?

Yes, but those clinics around the world that provide abortions will be cut funding, and will thus reduce their ability to provide those services. With the net result of more unwanted pregnancies and MORE abortions.

Yeah... Canada as the 51st state. ..But regardless of whether he goes that extreme or not, as long as there is ANY discomfort for Canadian business, you are going to see another rise in the calls to join the USA. These have been somewhat quiet of late, but I am betting that they will start again.

Oh, but they are. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/23/trump-abortion-gag-rule-international-ngo-funding "Donald Trump on Monday signed an executive order banning international NGOs from providing abortion services or offering information about abortions if they receive US funding." The practical effect is: cutting funding.

It may be a choice, but it is not necessarily a completely FREE choice. Overwhelmingly, the highest PERCENTAGE of pregnancies are aborted by RICH single women. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/01/how_long_would_a_liberal_have_to_cry_to_fill_up_a_liberal_tears_coffee_mug.html ... but the most abortions are by POOR single women.... precisely those women who are less education, are more apt to be in abusive or "controlling" relationships, the women whose social, economic, and physical situation is totally unsuitable for rearing children. Those people need help. Increasing their access to birth control and other medical care, is much more likely to decrease the rate of unwanted pregnancy and actually REDUCE the rate of abortions.... Cutting help off will only increase misery in many ways, not the least of which is that abortions will be done anyway in unsanitary and dangerous ways.

That is the whole point. Women don't. But they also don't want a bunch of old, white men telling them what they can and cannot do. Basically, it is as simple as that. It is too bad that medical records are so meticulously protected. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that, of all those white men in the Oval Office, that some one in there had a family member that has had an abortion.

It is not a "good" deal if it is in the best interest of one party at the expense of another. That is called: exploitation.

The same reason as ANY big disaster. Everest earthquake, Malaysian air crashes, etc., etc. etc. They all affect many people in negative ways.

We will have to wait to see whether re-negotiating NAFTA turns out to be "negotiation" or "extortion". There is no doubt that the superior resources of the larger country can "slam" Canada. That why countries have treaties.... agreements specifically crafted so that "slamming" does not happen in either direction. Else it becomes a road to civil unrest and even war.

Since Trump has already indicated "me first", which is another way of saying: "Any deal I make is going to screw you", .... ... then why should Canada bother to respond at all? If he decides to impose his 35 percent tarriffs, his own States and businesses will pretty soon change his mind, themselves.

Does this sound like the old "better to be Red than Dead" resignation of some during the dark 50s and 60s? Do you ever consider why we evolved INTO all these rules and regulations? You only have to look back less than 10 years for the most recent example that decimated untold thousands of people. You want to return to 2008, do you? And not only banking..... Acid rain, asbestos, tobacco, automobiles before Nader, labour exploitation, and on and on. If business were willing to be ethical and clean up after themselves, .... yes...we would not need regulation. They aren't and don't, and they need to be chased every step of the way. Regulation of those things is what makes Canada "a nice place to live". Take them away, and you have just another ugly country of the rich exploiting the poor, in a long list.

Trudeau was a teacher. He has had experience dealing with unruly children.