Dearche @ Dearche @lemmy.ca

Posts

0

Comments

412

Joined

2 yr. ago

To that I agree as well. Actually, several companies did that exactly when Trump first went to office and made his original threats. They already stopped taking new orders from the states due to the uncertainty.

That said, it still has no effect on already signed contracts, unless if the customer goes bankrupt while the deal is active or something (entirely possible considering the situation). Otherwise, the reliability of knowing you can renew your contracts is gone, which is why so much of Canadian products are being renegotiated to go to the EU or east Asia instead.

I'm of the opinion nearly the opposite. Frankly speaking, he doesn't care how much the people suffer. Half the population could starve to death and he'd just shrug and say "skill issue".

I do agree that what we do needs to hurt quickly, but the target are the oligarchs that Trump listens to, not the common people. I mean, unless if you're trying to incite a civil war over there, but Jan6 couldn't even be considered anything close to such a thing, and I doubt they'll reach that point in 4 years no matter how badly they run things into the ground short of publicly executing entire protest marches.

Hell, we should be tariffing everything from Musk's companies at this point considering he spends more time coming up with those executive orders than Trump does reading them.

Though many other American services would be more difficult since there's a serious lack of alternatives to many of them, especially those not also from the US.

This I wholeheartedly agree with. The benefits of alternative transit solutions are countless, not to mention that they all reduce traffic in the first place, one of the biggest complaints of Ontarians.

And frankly, many of Toronto's mayors and councils have been pushing this and been making real progress. Unfortunately a particular premier decided that he knew better and should have the power to redesign the city and its roads, rather than the people elected specifically to do that job.

Especially since I think most of our foundries are near the St Lawrence, so it'll be easy to ship it all pretty much anywhere in the world.

I agree, but once you sign the contract, you don't have a choice, unless if there's a clause to state that if the import cost changes, you can break the contract. But I strongly doubt most contracts include such a clause. Not that it matters much since as long as the product is delivered, customers are obligated to pay the full cost, including import taxes since they ordered the product in the first place.

Alright, I see the disconnect here. You're talking about rural bike lanes as well as park paths. I'm talking about city bike lanes where you have about 12 meters to work with before you're up against buildings on both sides half the time.

In that context, there's only so much you can do to widen lanes, and usually that's only possible by removing lanes for other modes of transit.

Frankly speaking, bike lanes of other areas have to go based on different standards as they exist for different purposes, so I've been isolating entirely to typical city streets.

Most of the sidewalks plus bike lanes in Toronto at least tend to only add up to about five meters in width at most, with plenty being only three meters wide together (two for the sidewalk, and one for the bike lane), with streets being between one or two lanes for the most part, excluding certain major streets.

In this context, it's crazy to think about bikes and wheelchairs sharing space together. And to be frank, even if the space was double that, I think the difference in typical speed makes such considerations still crazy. Just because some mobility scooters and electric wheelchairs are physically able to go as fast as a slow bike, doesn't mean that it's safe for them to share space.

If you can somehow make bike paths on the roads at least four meters wide, then sure, we can talk about that. But I've never seen such a thing anywhere in my city. Anything wider than 1.5 meters is simply doesn't exist, and that is far too narrow to allow both forms of travel to share space safely.

No, actually, I think supply chains will change a lot, but mostly because nobody wants to trade with an unreliable partner unless if the profits are high enough.

US will be paying more for everything, and will have more trouble getting deals made because they will be on a shorter term basis. Not the decade long deals they are used to, but ones that are only months long because you don't want to be chained to a country when the laws related to your products can change at a moment's notice.

Merely pushing back against a leader that is breaking his own laws doesn't warrent us paying any attention beyond putting it up on Just For Laughs.

Making those leaders that are actively breaking so many laws actually pay the piper is the bare minimum to make it worth sitting up for, and the US has two sitting presidents that needs to be addressed this way.

It's only a bombshell if it's unexpected.

And frankly speaking, I'd be more surprised to hear about a leader in Alberta that isn't massively corrupt and destroying their province at every turn.

Then again, I feel the same way over here in Ontario with our leaders. We've got an election going on, and only a single indie has a written platform on their web site so far. Not a single major party has a single specific thing to stand on, including the party that declared the snap election.

Agreed.

Especially perplexing is why the hell isn't Alberta doing it itself? Bitumen is quite difficult to transfer as it needs to be kept hot to be liquid enough to transport, yet they went so far in for the keystone XL pipeline that had to be heated its entire way to Texas.

Not to mention that our trade deals with the US has them selling their oil far below world market prices, so refining it locally would massively raise their profits and they can even start producing plastics, not just fuels. The number of industries they could put together and attract US money over the decades is countless, yet they've been so satisfied selling their resources to the lowest bidder this entire time.

Makes me wonder where the loyalties of Albertian premiers over the decades lie, especially when they keep cutting local services while blaming the rest of the country why their people keep suffering.

I'm sorry, but Canada is one of the most food and energy secure countries in the world. We're a net exporter of both, and by massive margins. We basically export so much energy, that that one ticket is enough to make our massive trade deficit into a massive trade surplus, the very thing Trump complains about. It's like a third of our entire export by value to the US.

And we single-handedly fed the Soviets during the cold war as well, being the only country with enough surplus in food to feed them during their massive self-inflicted famines, and preventing them from going to war out of sheer desperation.

It's people like this that is destroying Canadian sovereignty, not trying to secure it. We need to be united more than ever as we shift gears, diversity our trade, and improve relations with other countries for the sake of our sovereignty, not attack each other in petty attempts at power grabs.

I think there's a disconnect of what people mean by fast and slow here. A slow cyclist is still going at 15km/h, and 30km/h isn't even that fast, more comparable to a jogger than a sprinter for pedestrians.

Whereas electric wheelchairs are optimized to move within walking speeds, so about 4-6km/h. Having someone move 5km/h share space with someone going 20km/h+ is like having roads that share 60km/h with those going at 20km/h. Anybody would agree that it's unsafe for such a discrepancy on a road, so why isn't it also true on bike lanes?

Not to mention that some bike lanes are actually too narrow for wheelchairs to fit. I know some that are less than one meter wide because our city sucks and we've had mayors do their best to abolish bike lanes while others try to bring them back, only for the premier to try his turn to abolish them. Imagine trying to fit anything but a bike when you're flanked with concrete walls about 70cm apart?

Though I also admit, some sidewalks are hardly any better, and there's entire sections of the city that have zero side walks as well, but those areas also have zero bike lanes despite allowing cars to go 40km/h or even higher.

The issue here sounds like is caused by the separation itself being physical. If you start at one side, even if you realize you made a mistake, you can't correct it until you reach a point where the there's a crossing or some sort of merger, causing more issues.

That's why all the separated side-walk/bike lanes I know are separated by painted lines instead of grass or trees. It makes it easy to cross one to reach the other and to correct yourself if you started on the wrong one.

Though I admit there's always bad actors that ignore this, those are by far the minority, and if a cyclist is doing so, they'll usually give up because they can't stand being delayed by slower moving pedestrians.

I'm sorry, but I'm pretty sure that most wheelchairs and mobility scooters aren't designed to handle going at 20km/h+ for long distances. Not to mention that they're wider than bikes.

This is horribly naïve and is just turning bike lanes into extended sidewalks because someone doesn't want to walk around disabled people. Instead, make sure that sidewalks are wide enough for people to walk anything wider than single file. Side walks and bike lanes are only a fraction the cost of normal roads, support far more people, and increase local businesses because a car's not gonna park every two blocks to buy a coffee then a single t-shirt, then a new notebook before going to work, but pedestrians and cyclists can and do easily do this.

We don't, but the White House does it seems. Since President Musk repeats anything the Russians say, and even his minister of intelligence is a known Russian spy apparently.

For incoming products, sure, but I don't see how that applies to outgoing products? If we sell something to the US, and it gets a tariff applied after the sale but before delivery, it's the receiver that has to pay the tariff, so the only risk is for multiple delivery contracts being cancelled.

We have no problems with pricing since any tariffs we put on will have advance warning unlike that buffoon that comes up with an idea and signs it in place within two days.

I mean, if he wasn't a complete hypocrite about it, then he would also get rid of any MPs on his side that wore any expensive clothes or accessories, but he never even mentions that his sides doesn't do it, because he can't afford the possibility of bringing attention that way.

Fortunately, lots of basic things are actually real easy to figure out even without checking labels. In Ontario at least, milk, eggs, most meat, grains and potatoes are almost all are Canadian, including products that are mostly made from those.

As long as you cook, it's real easy to stay on this side of the boarder when it comes to groceries, and a lot of these products already have labels to advertise being local.

A guy I watch ran the numbers about it actually, and the results were funny. Basically, presuming that imports and purchasing trends stayed the same, to replace income tax with tariffs, everything being brought in would have to get a near 100% tariff to cover the difference.

Basically have to double the cost of living in order to cover the lost income from getting rid of income tax.