kEiThZ
Superstar
Not just that. The company that is bidding in the Canadian submarine program is Hanhwa Ocean. Literally a competitor to Hyundai Heavy Industries. So not even the same family.
|
|
|
PM Mark Carney's Canada
- Thread starter Richard White
- Start date
Not just that. The company that is bidding in the Canadian submarine program is Hanhwa Ocean. Literally a competitor to Hyundai Heavy Industries. So not even the same family.
picard102
Senior Member
They already allow EU cars in the US if they are collector cars, meaning 15 years or older.
I can't imagine why a EU car wouldn't pass US standards or Canadian standards for that matter.
kEiThZ
Superstar
The standards are different. US (and synch'd Canadian) standards are heavily focused on crash safety. European standards are focused more on pedestrian safety. There are distinctive design choices there that can be contradictory in each jurisdiction.
There's also all kinds of little differences that I found out when importing my Canadian standard German built VW to the US when I was posted there. From seatbelt buttons being different colours to mandatory requirements for tire pressure monitoring systems in the US. Ultimately, I simply kept my Canadian plates on, because the hassle of trying to get my car to meet US standards was too much work for the 2.5 years I was there. But I also had exemptions under state law for foreign military personnel, which would apply to normal imports.
All in all, the standards are different enough to be a substantial barrier to imports. As a fan of European cars, I'd be thrilled to have EU standards. But I also know from experience what a hassle taking a car to the US was. And I worry that Americans might use this as an excuse to thicken the border.
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
I just want to say that having debate on living income is a good conversation to have. It gets people thinking about this, which is a good thing here...
...but I do want to make clear of from at least where I come from that there are two position I've come to stand by, that is:
1) To have an adequate livable income is a human right.
2) To be adequately and sufficiently housed is a human right.
I get this is not going to sit pretty with many here, but it is a philosophy I stand by where our government should do it's best to enact and enable regardless of their colours and stripes, or the economic situation we find ourselves in...along with protecting all our other civil liberties.
In doing so, I do not believe that this is a burden that should be passed onto the consumer. Nor should it stymie our economy or markets...unless they're planning to relocate this country to the Moon. Nor should we turn into something like Argentina because of it - like we would be anything near that jurisdiction even with the imposed tariffs...there's too much integrity built into our government system for one.
That said, this is my opinion...and one that is not very popular. But I suspect by stating this, that government will unlikely suddenly drop whatever they're doing and adopt my views or for any foreseeable future. So your investments should be safe for now. But that won't stop me from advocating my fantasy in becoming a reality. I swear though, no elves or dragons are involved in said musings. That's all. <3
...but I do want to make clear of from at least where I come from that there are two position I've come to stand by, that is:
1) To have an adequate livable income is a human right.
2) To be adequately and sufficiently housed is a human right.
I get this is not going to sit pretty with many here, but it is a philosophy I stand by where our government should do it's best to enact and enable regardless of their colours and stripes, or the economic situation we find ourselves in...along with protecting all our other civil liberties.
In doing so, I do not believe that this is a burden that should be passed onto the consumer. Nor should it stymie our economy or markets...unless they're planning to relocate this country to the Moon. Nor should we turn into something like Argentina because of it - like we would be anything near that jurisdiction even with the imposed tariffs...there's too much integrity built into our government system for one.
That said, this is my opinion...and one that is not very popular. But I suspect by stating this, that government will unlikely suddenly drop whatever they're doing and adopt my views or for any foreseeable future. So your investments should be safe for now. But that won't stop me from advocating my fantasy in becoming a reality. I swear though, no elves or dragons are involved in said musings. That's all. <3
Last edited:
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Size has a lot to do with it. In 2013, I stayed with friends in Garmisch-Partenkirchen in Bavaria, and my host worked at the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies (a US and German defense and security training institute). We used to laugh at the sight of the huge American vehicles trying to squeeze down the narrow Bavarian streets. Honestly, who needs a Ford F150 in such a small town as below?
kEiThZ
Superstar
Size has a lot to do with it. In 2013, I stayed with friends in Garmisch-Partenkirchen in Bavaria, and my host worked at the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies (a US and German defense and security training institute). We used to laugh at the sight of the huge American vehicles trying to squeeze down the narrow Bavarian streets. Honestly, who needs a Ford F150 in such a small town as below?
Good spot. I did some courses up the street at the NATO School in Oberammergau. Trips like that are what got me interested in urbanism and hence onto this forum. It's always easy to tell who from the military got posted to Europe or Asia. That exposures makes the majority of people urbanists.
Mihairokov
Senior Member
It's basically that whole thing that's like the best time in an American's life is when they live on a walkable college campus in a 15-minute city but can't put two-and-two together on that sort of POV when they eventually end up living in a suburb.
Mihairokov
Senior Member
Sounds like the meeting between Carney and Xi went well. China have invited Carney for a state visit in Beijing, which would be the first time a high-level visit has taken place since Trudeau went to Beijing in 2017.
Towered
Superstar
EBT must be over the moon.
EBT
Active Member
No, I am not. Carney did not get anything from that meeting other than an invitation to visit Xi in China at some undetermined date. I was expecting a deal on tariffs, i.e., Canada backing off our 100% tariffs on EVs in exchange for China lifting 100% tariffs on our farmers and fishermen. I also didn't like the language that Carney used in his statement after the meeting:
"President Xi and I met today at the APEC Summit, marking a turning point in the bilateral relationship between Canada and China. We are committed to renewing the relationship in a pragmatic and constructive way"
Why did Carney say "pragmatic"? This implies that Canada doesn't really want to be doing business with China, but we are forced to because Trump has taken a sledgehammer to our economy. It was stupid to use the word pragmatic. Carney's statement should have sounded more enthusiastic. China has the biggest economy in the world, and it grows ever bigger with each passing year. China is at the head of the biggest trading block in the world - BRICS - that dwarfs the G7. Canada needs to get in that circle of countries if we want to have a bright future. It's worth remembering that Donald Trump is the only reason why relations between Canada and China soured. It was Trump who told Trudeau to illegally arrest the daughter of Huawei's founder and hold her hostage on bogus charges for over a year.
picard102
Senior Member
EBT
Active Member
They were bogus charges. The DOJ alleged "bank fraud," specifically claiming Huawei misled HSBC in Hong Kong over Huawei's business dealings in Iran. Why should this be any business of the United States? The US claimed it was a violation of its sanctions on Iran. Does the United States get to make the laws for the entire world to obey? Is that what you believe Picard? And why did the US have sanctions on Iran? What did Iran do to the US? The answer is nothing. The US has sanctions on Iran because the Israel lobby controls the United States, and especially Donald Trump, and because of this, Canada got caught in the crossfire, and relations with our second most important trading customer were almost irreparably damaged.
Canada's arrest of Meng Wanzhou pursuant to an American extradition warrant was illegal because Canada only detains persons pending extradition hearings in the case of "dual criminality," i.e., the detainee would have to be accused of a crime that is illegal in Canada. As an example, the case of accused murderers. Murder is illegal in both countries. Canada did not criminalize doing business with Iran, so there was no basis for Meng to be detained.
Last edited:
picard102
Senior Member
Northern Light
Superstar
To be fair, I don't believe he suggested that what was alleged was not true; simply that it was legitimate to consider it a crime; and that it was not a crime under Canadian law, which generally means it is not an extraditable offense.
Mihairokov
Senior Member
We did it at the behest of the Americans. Those days are now over.