building Chinese cars here in Canada....

[Army Guy]

8 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

What did you go to school for again?  🙄

Like i said nothing more than chirping.....it is what you do best, you and down arrow boy 

[Moonbox]

1 minute ago, Army Guy said:

Like i said nothing more than chirping.....it is what you do best, you and down arrow boy 

What do you think you're doing here, other than chirping and then crying about other people chirping?  Your posts are so f*cking dumb these days you have to wonder if you're going senile or something...just an old man shaking his first and yelling at clouds.  

[TreeBeard]

19 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Your posts are so f*cking dumb these days you have to wonder if you're going senile or something..

I think a lot of the Con partisans absolutely lost their $hit after the Libs won another election. They saw their party up 20 pts and thought this was it and when the rug was pulled out, their heads exploded and they’re still in a rage. They hate the Libs more than they like Canada, so now Canada itself doesn’t deserve to be defended by these people. 

[Legato]

3 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

I think a lot of the Con partisans absolutely lost their $hit after the Libs won another election. They saw their party up 20 pts and thought this was it and when the rug was pulled out, their heads exploded and they’re still in a rage. They hate the Libs more than they like Canada, so now Canada itself doesn’t deserve to be defended by these people. 

 

[Goddess]

16 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

They hate the Libs more than they like Canada,

We love Canada.  It's just quite frustrating to watch you guys love the most incompetent political party in Canada's history more than YOU love Canada, so much so that you don't care that they've spent over a decade driving it into the toilet and vote for even more incompetence.

Take your "Libs love Canada more than Cons" garbage and shove it.

 

[Army Guy]

22 hours ago, Moonbox said:

What do you think you're doing here, other than chirping and then crying about other people chirping?  Your posts are so f*cking dumb these days you have to wonder if you're going senile or something...just an old man shaking his first and yelling at clouds.  

You've literal describe yourself...Take a look at any of your posts, very rarely do you stay on topic, and they ALWAYS end up, with you adding nothing of value...you used to be one of the more sensible posters on here, now you just a Douch bag with an axe to grind....with nothing of value to contribute....you and red arrow boy should take a break...It seems you can't handle the added stress of discussion...

[Army Guy]

2 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

I think a lot of the Con partisans absolutely lost their $hit after the Libs won another election. They saw their party up 20 pts and thought this was it and when the rug was pulled out, their heads exploded and they’re still in a rage. They hate the Libs more than they like Canada, so now Canada itself doesn’t deserve to be defended by these people. 

Thanks doc Phil for the insightful comment...I did not know you liberals were so talented...My head is still intact but thanks for the concern...., and hate is to powerful a word to be used in this case i don't hate liberals there really not worth that much effort. but your right i don't really like liberals or anyone from the left really, .."they" are largely responsible for our current troubles, or had a huge hand in steering the country in the wrong direction...almost like it was intentional....

Who is going to defend the nation, the left...come on....you guys were extremely happy when starving our military of funds to put towards social programs...the left rarely joins the military and those that do quickly switch sides....unless your red arrow boy...but he is not right in the head to start with...You've survived this far being defended by the right...no point in changing things...

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

The last American car I owned was a Chev Celebrity in the previous century. The rear axle snapped while I was turning off the TCH, fortunately at low speed. I’ve been buying Japanese and Korean cars ever since. First thing I noticed about the Camry - it was better in snow without snow tires than the Chev was with them.

Edited April 16 by SpankyMcFarland

[LinkSoul60]

16 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Who is going to defend the nation, the left...come on....you guys were extremely happy when starving our military of funds to put towards social programs...

Actually, your guy Harper spent the least of any PM as a percentage of GDP the on military.

Stephen Harper's government limited military spending to roughly 1% of GDP, the lowest in Canadian history, primarily to balance the federal budget, cut nearly $5 billion since 2012, and manage a dysfunctional procurement system that could not spend allocated funds, leading to nearly $10 billion in underspending. Despite "tough" rhetoric and the initial Afghanistan-era boost, spending was cut to focus on reducing national debt. 

CBC +5

Key factors for reduced spending included:

• Fiscal Restraint and Deficit Reduction: Following the costly Afghanistan mission, the Conservatives implemented the Strategic Review and Deficit Reduction Action Plan (DRAP), cutting 400 positions and reducing overall defense funding.
• Procurement Failures: Major procurement projects, such as ships and aircraft, faced massive delays, causing the Department of National Defence to return funds to the Treasury rather than spending them.
• Failed Procurement Projects: Projects for Navy destroyers and replacements for aging equipment (like the CF-18s) stalled or failed, leaving the military with aging, "clapped out" gear.
• Shift in Focus: The government shifted from a focus on combat in Afghanistan to administrative and logistical constraints, which reduced the immediate demand for high-cost operational funding.

[LinkSoul60]

On 4/14/2026 at 9:46 AM, paxamericana said:

Your market can’t compete with American producers.

Uncle Sam...  you're obviously not aware but those American producers that we can't compete with are the same producers we have in Canada. 

 

 

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

The last American car I owned was a Chev Celebrity in the previous century. The rear axle snapped while I was turning off the TCH, fortunately at low speed. I’ve been buying Japanese and a Korean cars ever since. First thing I noticed about the Camry - it was better in snow without snow tires than the Chev was with them.

The little standard Ford Ranger pickup I drive is the best North American vehicle I've ever owned. But Asian cars are definitely superior. Our Honda CRV topping the list. I'm hoping it'll be the last ICE car we own and look forward to getting an Asian EV ASAP.

[paxamericana]

2 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

The last American car I owned was a Chev Celebrity in the previous century. The rear axle snapped while I was turning off the TCH, fortunately at low speed. I’ve been buying Japanese and a Korean cars ever since. First thing I noticed about the Camry - it was better in snow without snow tires than the Chev was with them.

Welcome to the 2026 and the world of traction control LOL

[herbie]

People mocked the VW Beetle when it first was sold here. Laughed at Japanese cars. At Korean ones just a few years ago. The 'foreign' cars are now most of the market. Might be early to mock Chinese ones....
Better to take a slice of the job pie than none

They might even rebadge them as Dodge or Chrysler so they have something to sell....

[SpankyMcFarland]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

The little standard Ford Ranger pickup I drive is the best North American vehicle I've ever owned. But Asian cars are definitely superior. Our Honda CRV topping the list. I'm hoping it'll be the last ICE car we own and look forward to getting an Asian EV ASAP.

I find SUVs these days are not built to last but I have a CRV on the premises from twenty five years ago that still runs. A truly great car.

Edited April 16 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

10 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

The last American car I owned was a Chev Celebrity in the previous century.

LOL  read that far and thought "well this story isn't going to have a happy ending... "  

 

[Army Guy]

On 4/16/2026 at 11:49 AM, LinkSoul60 said:

Actually, your guy Harper spent the least of any PM as a percentage of GDP the on military.

Stephen Harper's government limited military spending to roughly 1% of GDP, the lowest in Canadian history, primarily to balance the federal budget, cut nearly $5 billion since 2012, and manage a dysfunctional procurement system that could not spend allocated funds, leading to nearly $10 billion in underspending. Despite "tough" rhetoric and the initial Afghanistan-era boost, spending was cut to focus on reducing national debt. 

CBC +5

Key factors for reduced spending included:

• Fiscal Restraint and Deficit Reduction: Following the costly Afghanistan mission, the Conservatives implemented the Strategic Review and Deficit Reduction Action Plan (DRAP), cutting 400 positions and reducing overall defense funding.
• Procurement Failures: Major procurement projects, such as ships and aircraft, faced massive delays, causing the Department of National Defence to return funds to the Treasury rather than spending them.
• Failed Procurement Projects: Projects for Navy destroyers and replacements for aging equipment (like the CF-18s) stalled or failed, leaving the military with aging, "clapped out" gear.
• Shift in Focus: The government shifted from a focus on combat in Afghanistan to administrative and logistical constraints, which reduced the immediate demand for high-cost operational funding.

Harper was not the lowest , that would be Mr Chrétien

What your failing to mention is the largest cuts to the military where incurred during Chretien rein, lets not forget the decade of darkness where the military budget started at 1.9 % of GDP and ended at .08. % of GDP....the largest cut in Canada's history...

During the Jean Chrétien era (1993–2003), Canadian military spending fell significantly, reaching a low of approximately 1.1% to 1.2% of GDP by the early 2000s, down from nearly 1.9% in 1992. These austerity measures, driven by1995 federal budget cuts, led to what some analysts and military personnel, such as General Rick Hillier, termed a "decade of darkness" for the Canadian Armed Forces. 

Atlantic Council +2

Key details regarding military spending under Chrétien:

The "Decade of Darkness": Defense spending saw major cuts to help balance the federal budget, resulting in some of the lowest spending levels in Canadian history.

Declining Percentages: While inherited from the late Cold War, spending dropped from around 1.9% of GDP in 1992 to approximately 0.8% in 1999 (data sometimes varies slightly, with other estimates placing it closer to 1.1% by 2001).

Post-Cold War Context: Similar to other nations in the 1990s, the Liberal government reduced defence commitments, resulting in reductions to staff, procurement, and equipment availability. 

 

It should also be noted that all spending in Afghanistan came out of the military budget, with both governments , combined with cuts the military have to come up with the total price tag of the mission, including those projects lead by global affairs....

 

HARPER...

Military spending during 

Stephen Harper's

 term (2006–2015) was characterized by an initial surge to support the Afghanistan mission followed by deep cuts as the government shifted focus toward eliminating the federal deficit. 

CBC +2

 

Key Spending Trends

• Initial Increases (2006–2009): Early in his term, Harper pledged the "largest increase in military spending in a generation". Spending rose from approximately $15 billion in 2005 to a peak of nearly $21 billion by 2011.
• Post-2012 Reductions: Following the 2008 recession, the government enacted major budget cuts. By 2014, defense spending dropped to 1% of GDP, which was the lowest level relative to the economy in Canadian history at that time.
• Budget Underspending: Reports indicate that between 2006 and 2015, the Conservative government failed to spend roughly $10 billion of its own approved military budgets.
• Inflation Impact: While the nominal budget grew from $16 billion in 2005 to $19 billion by 2015, the inflation-adjusted value remained virtually unchanged at around $16.1 billion. 
  The Dorchester Review +4

 

Major Initiatives and Procurement

• The Canada First Defence Strategy (2008): A 20-year plan that envisioned spending $490 billion to replace major fleets and increase troop strength to 70,000. Much of this strategy was eventually abandoned due to high costs.
• Equipment Acquisitions: Successes included the purchase of C-17 Globemaster heavy-lift planes, C-130J Hercules transports, and Leopard 2 tanks for use in Afghanistan.
• Procurement Delays: Many high-profile projects faced significant setbacks or "lapses" in funding, including:
  • F-35 Fighter Jets: The planned replacement for the CF-18s became a persistent political and budgetary headache.
  • Navy Vessels: Delivery dates for destroyers and support ships slipped repeatedly, with billions in spending deferred.
  • Arctic Patrol Ships: These were part of Harper's specific focus on Arctic sovereignty but experienced long lead times

Edited April 17 by Army Guy

[LinkSoul60]

3 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Harper was not the lowest , that would be Mr Chrétien

What your failing to mention is the largest cuts to the military where incurred during Chretien rein, lets not forget the decade of darkness where the military budget started at 1.9 % of GDP and ended at .08. % of GDP....the largest cut in Canada's history...

During the Jean Chrétien era (1993–2003), Canadian military spending fell significantly, reaching a low of approximately 1.1% to 1.2% of GDP by the early 2000s, down from nearly 1.9% in 1992. These austerity measures, driven by1995 federal budget cuts, led to what some analysts and military personnel, such as General Rick Hillier, termed a "decade of darkness" for the Canadian Armed Forces. 

Atlantic Council +2

Key details regarding military spending under Chrétien:

The "Decade of Darkness": Defense spending saw major cuts to help balance the federal budget, resulting in some of the lowest spending levels in Canadian history.

Declining Percentages: While inherited from the late Cold War, spending dropped from around 1.9% of GDP in 1992 to approximately 0.8% in 1999 (data sometimes varies slightly, with other estimates placing it closer to 1.1% by 2001).

Post-Cold War Context: Similar to other nations in the 1990s, the Liberal government reduced defence commitments, resulting in reductions to staff, procurement, and equipment availability. 

 

It should also be noted that all spending in Afghanistan came out of the military budget, with both governments , combined with cuts the military have to come up with the total price tag of the mission, including those projects lead by global affairs....

 

HARPER...

Military spending during 

Stephen Harper's

 term (2006–2015) was characterized by an initial surge to support the Afghanistan mission followed by deep cuts as the government shifted focus toward eliminating the federal deficit. 

CBC +2

 

Key Spending Trends

• Initial Increases (2006–2009): Early in his term, Harper pledged the "largest increase in military spending in a generation". Spending rose from approximately $15 billion in 2005 to a peak of nearly $21 billion by 2011.
• Post-2012 Reductions: Following the 2008 recession, the government enacted major budget cuts. By 2014, defense spending dropped to 1% of GDP, which was the lowest level relative to the economy in Canadian history at that time.
• Budget Underspending: Reports indicate that between 2006 and 2015, the Conservative government failed to spend roughly $10 billion of its own approved military budgets.
• Inflation Impact: While the nominal budget grew from $16 billion in 2005 to $19 billion by 2015, the inflation-adjusted value remained virtually unchanged at around $16.1 billion. 
  The Dorchester Review +4

 

Major Initiatives and Procurement

• The Canada First Defence Strategy (2008): A 20-year plan that envisioned spending $490 billion to replace major fleets and increase troop strength to 70,000. Much of this strategy was eventually abandoned due to high costs.
• Equipment Acquisitions: Successes included the purchase of C-17 Globemaster heavy-lift planes, C-130J Hercules transports, and Leopard 2 tanks for use in Afghanistan.
• Procurement Delays: Many high-profile projects faced significant setbacks or "lapses" in funding, including:
  • F-35 Fighter Jets: The planned replacement for the CF-18s became a persistent political and budgetary headache.
  • Navy Vessels: Delivery dates for destroyers and support ships slipped repeatedly, with billions in spending deferred.
  • Arctic Patrol Ships: These were part of Harper's specific focus on Arctic sovereignty but experienced long lead times

Partially correct... Harper spent to support the Afghanistan mission but after that cut to it to 1%, which is the lowest spending by a PM. 

The Harper Plan for Unilateral Canadian Disarmament

By Michael Byers, National Post.  July 15,2014

Despite his tough talk about supporting the troops, Stephen Harper has reduced defence spending to just 1% of GDP — the lowest level in Canadian history.   For decades, Canada’s level of defence spending was comparable to that of Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Norway (all currently at 1.4%). After the Cold War ended, Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin reduced defence spending to 1.2% of GDP — leading to what General Rick Hillier called a “decade of darkness.” The Afghanistan mission necessitated an increase, with spending returning to 1.4% by 2009.  But then Harper cut deep: At 1% of GDP, Canada’s new defence spending peers are Belgium, Latvia and Slovakia.

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/natosource/the-harper-plan-for-unilateral-canadian-disarmament/

 

Back to Chinese EV's...  Obviously with 25% tariffs the US wants to build the cars there. The supply chain is highly integrated so we're still going to build cars, just less. Rather than saying uncle and accepting that, we're doing the right thing in trying to create more consumer demand and corporate investment. Trump's not a bright guy but the guy who is negotiating (Greer) isn't a trade dummy. I'm sure the cusma agreement will change a bit and be good for everyone and I'd bet today's high sectoral tariffs be adjusted much lower, whenever that may be so this trade thing is behind us and them. Trump needs it behind him too with the majority of American's against tariffs policies, inflation, really high gas prices, and house and senate seats that could/will be lost.  Apparently this is the golden age.

 

 

[herbie]

Oh FFS let's not hijack this thread with military spending. Start a new one on that subject.
We're talking about Canada's civilian auto industry here.

[paxamericana]

38 minutes ago, herbie said:

Canada's civilian auto industry

Soon to be the world’s largest breadline for pensioners like @Zeitgeist

Edited April 18 by paxamericana

[Zeitgeist]

20 hours ago, paxamericana said:

Soon to be the world’s largest breadline for pensioners like @Zeitgeist

Ha ha, nice provocation.  I don’t plan to stop working anytime soon.  Let’s not forget that the EV deal with China was basically a compromise that reopened China’s market to some of our agricultural products in exchange for giving China some access to our auto market.  Saskatchewan benefitted most from this.  Arguably Ontario takes the biggest hit on this to its auto manufacturing industry.

However, there is a potential upside for partnering with China and other countries on EV manufacturing and technology. The US is squelching its EV industry at its peril, because both in terms of cost and environmental benefits, EVs are the way to go in the long run.  Canada had started setting up a lot of EV battery production and infrastructure when the US pulled the plug on EV supportive regulations.  China’s entry into the Canadian market is a boost to the EV economy overall, bringing competition and upward productivity pressures, a good thing.

It also comes at a time when we have no choice but to diversify trade partnerships.  Canada doesn’t play zero-sum might is right games.  We can’t play those games, not just because we’re a middle power, but because sometimes short-term wins lead to long term losses, which seems to be a lesson lost on the current US administration.  Fleece people once and they probably won’t want to deal with you a second time if they don’t have to.

[paxamericana]

9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

EV

Supply exceeds demand.

11 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

diversify trade partnerships.  Canada doesn’t play zero-sum might is right games.  We can’t play those games

Good luck with that.

13 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

play zero-sum might is right games

Demographics says it is. There’s a shrinking consumer pool and they are mostly in America. Get the birth rate above replacement and then We can talk about enlarging the pie.

[Zeitgeist]

17 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

Supply exceeds demand.

Good luck with that.

Demographics says it is. There’s a shrinking consumer pool and they are mostly in America. Get the birth rate above replacement and then We can talk about enlarging the pie.

Well Canada is going to do it the same way as most of the West, through immigration.  I agree that we need to boost the birth rate, but the Liberal government has done a number of anti-family, anti-fertility things: promoting LGBTQ+ lifestyles (including spending tax dollars on Pride flags and organizations like Egale and pflag), giving free birth control to everyone (and thereby dousing our water supply with estrogen and turning men into women), expanding assisted suicide (Canada has the fastest rising assisted suicide rate in the world and it is now one of the leading causes of death), has one of the most permissive abortion laws, and Canada was into the safe injection sites and not enforcing laws against hard drugs.

Canada has been run by radical left wing lunatics under Trudeau for almost a decade, causing unprecedentedly high immigration levels and debt.  Canada needed a Trump-like figure even more than the US, but because of Trump’s threatening rhetoric towards Canada, we got a lighter version of left wing lunatics instead of a Conservative government. In fairness, Carney does seem to be influential and adept in economics and international affairs. His big two challenges are replacing tariff-related economic losses with new business activity/markets and modernizing Canadian infrastructure and development, setting the conditions for greater productivity, growth, and independence.  So far he has the public support and now a majority government.  I’m tepidly optimistic and would’ve preferred a Conservative government.  

Edited April 19 by Zeitgeist

[paxamericana]

9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

business activity/markets and modernizing Canadian infrastructure and development, setting the conditions for greater productivity, growth, and independence.

Which requires capital, of which Americans has plenty. Why you all chose to not get American investment by agreeing to lower your protectionist policies is on you. Talk about spilling milk eh?

See the old globalist playbook doesn’t work any more, the demographic doesn’t support it. 

Edited April 19 by paxamericana

[Zeitgeist]

28 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

Which requires capital, of which Americans has plenty. Why you all chose to not get American investment by agreeing to lower your protectionist policies is on you. Talk about spilling milk eh?

See the old globalist playbook doesn’t work any more, the demographic doesn’t support it. 

Really, after all the job losses and massive tariffs on steel, aluminum, and autos, you think this is about dairy farmers?  Our tariffs on US dairy never kick in anyway because the export levels are never reached.  This trade war, started by the US, has nothing to do with supply management or, in Canada’s case, trade imbalances.  This is entirely about the US looking for new revenue sources to bail the US out of debt and pay for Trump tax cuts.  It’s about replacing the internal revenue with external revenue, though of course it’s US consumers that pay the tariffs, and as US imports decrease under this scheme, so will its external revenue. Canada didn’t ask for this war and is adjusting so it can’t be put in this situation again. I think the result will be some trade diversification and increased exports of energy and resources, especially as new mining and delivery infrastructure comes online.  Canada will come through this more independent, and ideally, wealthier and more productive, but it will take some time and sacrifice.  No choice.  

Edited April 19 by Zeitgeist

[paxamericana]

4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

No choice.  

Oh come come, you were given a choice. 51st or did you forget?