• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CAN-USA 2025 Tariff Strife (split from various pol threads)

A utilities corridor could - and should - mean a swath of land tens of kilometres wide.
As a rough planning area...sure.

But I just measured...dual lane TransCanada highway + dual track CN mainline + TransMountain Pipeline (both pipes) + powerline utility corridor. 450m total width and they are not all adjacent to each other.

Don't get me wrong it's enough to disrupt animal movement patterns and species like the deer/elk/moose sure don't like the open areas.
But it's also pretty impressive how small some of the footprints actually are especially in the scale of the country's size.
 
No clue about you. Calling it how I see it. Alberta has threatened a constitutional crisis. Sounds very Quebecois to me.

They also likely have the second biggest separatist movement (despite being dwarfed by the largest) in the country.

Probably a result of the summer that I spent in Lotbiniere as a teen. Although maybe I have more SNP genes than I thought. :D
 
A utilities corridor could - and should - mean a swath of land tens of kilometres wide.

Redoing the CPR project. What did they get the rights to? 20 miles either side of the right of way or something like that?

I could see a similar easement being granted but I would expect the actual impact zone to be something like the width of the 401.
 
Which would likely defeat the purpose of minimizing the foot print if trying to minimize impact on FN etc.

Still a good idea.

But, as noted, at least some of these corridors are being proposed by first nations.

NeeStanan Corridor


The attached video has Tom Jackson as the front man.

It is worth giving their pitch a look - rail, pipelines, power lines, fibre optics, an LNG terminal on Hudson's Bay.

Their particular route may not be the right one - but they are open to something of the sort as long as they get their fair share.
 
Yeah, that went in a few weeks ago. Quite tellingly it allows for a third term only if the first two terms were non-consecutive. It’s a blatant pandering to Trump. It’s unconstitutional of course; the 22nd amendment expressly rules it out.
I get the feeling that this crew won’t care what the constitution or the courts say.

“How many divisions does the Supreme Court have?”
 
Amidst all the insanity going on south of the border, one congressman is introducing a bill that, if passed, would allow a third term for Trump. Unlikely to happen? Who would have thought that Trump would have been re-elected after the January 6th Capitol attack.

People shouldn’t believe it wouldn’t/couldn’t happen.

Yeah, that went in a few weeks ago. Quite tellingly it allows for a third term only if the first two terms were non-consecutive. It’s a blatant pandering to Trump. It’s unconstitutional of course; the 22nd amendment expressly rules it out.

True, however…

‘Un’constitutional just means there hasn’t been an Amendment yet to permit it.
 
If Brad West ever ran federally, it would probably be the first time I would vote NDP.


But one would think that if this was really bothering Trump, he would made some dumb clumsy comment about Canada “being controlled by CHAI-nuh” to explain their belligerence with us, instead of the assorted grab-bag of phoney grievances he’s already aired.

Just as the Trump-whisperers were wrong on his objectives with Russia and Ukraine, I think they’re wrong on his objectives with us.
 
But one would think that if this was really bothering Trump, he would made some dumb clumsy comment about Canada “being controlled by CHAI-nuh” to explain their belligerence with us, instead of the assorted grab-bag of phoney grievances he’s already aired.
This is a good point.

So why hasn’t it been heard as a point clearly stated by the US/Trump? Giving Canada some room to address the interference/incursion of foreign influence and organized crime? It would seem that many of the significant issues (Chinese-supported criminality IN Canada, money laundering, significant foreign real estate investment impacting housing affordability) are reaching levels that can’t be ignored…so when or will the US move on from an immigration/fentanyl problem to the other issues? I honestly don’t know at this point. If the issue truly is 43 lbs of fentanyl and a few thousand illegal immigrants from CAN>US (proportionately less than US>CAN), then one would question the validity and scale of the IS action towards Canada.
 
People shouldn’t believe it wouldn’t/couldn’t happen.



True, however…

‘Un’constitutional just means there hasn’t been an Amendment yet to permit it.
Right. Given the threshold for amendment, I believe repealing the term limit in the 22nd is a non-starter. I’m not concerned about Trump retaining power lawfully. He’s also quite old, and his usefulness to those building themselves up within the oligarchy will fade as other people and policies are entrenched. I’d be more concerned about who gets figureheaded as a successor.
 
Guys common, there is no business case to send our bountiful natural resources to market. We must focus on the new green machine, maybe our new cricket farms can solve hunger in africa.
 
There is no Team Canada. Quebec says no East/West pipeline, Supply Management is not on the table.
What Quebec wants, Quebec gets.
There is one solution: declare a National Imperative to get things done. Quebec doesn't like it, too fricken bad. Quebec has blackmailed Canada long enough.
 
More Team Canada? Not sure how they will square this one…


Any wonder we are getting screwed over yet?
That’s a private member’s bill from a member of the NDP who has already announced he won’t run again. It’s utterly meaningless and will likely not advance pst first reading, as is often the case with private members’ bills. Such bills are often nothing more than performative, and all parties have had their share of silliness hit Hansard that way.
 
That’s a private member’s bill from a member of the NDP who has already announced he won’t run again. It’s utterly meaningless and will likely not advance pst first reading, as is often the case with private members’ bills. Such bills are often nothing more than performative, and all parties have had their share of silliness hit Hansard that way.
He is a long serving MP who many Canadians voted for. It sends a message. And that message is disunity which hurts the country.
 
Back
Top