• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Canada ... it's really just northern Mexico at this point

Now let’s talk about the drug problem that Trump says we have yet Canadian news denies. Drug bust in Edmonton a couple days ago, close to a half million $$$ in meth (18 kgs) fentanyl (2 kgs) and other drugs and weapons, and another bust again in Edmonton again today, don’t remember how big. Closest city to me is Brandon , read an article from a few years ago and it said about 21% of the meth had fentanyl in it, heard on the radio yesterday that meth use has risen 5000% in the last couple years. So no, Canada doesn’t have a drug problem 🙄. I drive past a known 3 drug dealers on my way to town, and I’m sure there’s more that I don’t know of.
 
Now let’s talk about the drug problem that Trump says we have yet Canadian news denies. Drug bust in Edmonton a couple days ago, close to a half million $$$ in meth (18 kgs) fentanyl (2 kgs) and other drugs and weapons, and another bust again in Edmonton again today, don’t remember how big. Closest city to me is Brandon , read an article from a few years ago and it said about 21% of the meth had fentanyl in it, heard on the radio yesterday that meth use has risen 5000% in the last couple years. So no, Canada doesn’t have a drug problem 🙄. I drive past a known 3 drug dealers on my way to town, and I’m sure there’s more that I don’t know of.

Our adopted daughter's sisters lived in Edmonton for almost a year after fleeing Kiev when Putin started lobbing missiles into the city. We had them visit us in May of last year and they said the drug problem in Edmonton was horrific, they lived in a nicer area of the city but were afraid of going out unless they were in groups.

Lots of meth and marijuana.

But, to be fair, that describes a lot of big cities in a lot of countries
 
Would I want to join the states? That's a big HELL NO for me. Canada isn't perfect but at least I don't have to carry a six shooter to go to the grocery store and a sliver won't put me in bankruptcy.
The difference between the two countries is "choice". In Canada I CAN NOT carry a six shooter to the grocery store. In the USA I can IF I WANT TO (in most states as long as you follow the rules).

In the US I can purchase crappy government healthcare insurance for less than what I would pay in taxes in Canada IF I WANT TO. In Canada I HAVE to have crappy government healthcare insurance and can only get better insurance IF I WANT TO PAY FOR IT.

Choice ... it's a strange thing ... smells like, tastes like, and feels like ... freedom.
 
Everyone keeps going on about how terrible the Canadian Healthcare system is compared to the states. I go by experience.

When I was in a near fatal accident in 2015, I was rushed by ambulance to the hospital where I received top quality care in icu for 10 days and another 3 weeks in the regular ward of the hospital. That included daily mri, CT scans, x-rays, and physiotherapy. Do you know how much I spent out of pocket? 0$ Not once did I have to haul out a credit card and max it out to pay a doctor visit. Afterwards, I had a few complications that landed me back in the hospital for followup surgeries and dealing with infections. Again. Top quality care once I was admitted. Have I spent time waiting at emerge? Sure. But I will guarantee you that you go to any emergency room in the states and there are people waiting.

I have seen too many stories of people in the states losing everything when they discover that their excellent Health care coverage doesn't cover the bills from the hospital and they end up remortgaging their homes to cover the costs. Like I said, I don't believe that the Canadian Healthcare system is perfect by any means but I'm sure glad I didn't have to worry about how I'm going to pay for Healthcare when I was laying in a hospital bed for a month.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Doc
Pretty sure you keep bringing it up. You also brought up guns. The replies dispelled the myths.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc
Going back to the whole TRADE WAR - TARIFF issue, people and the media mistakenly believe it is misguided and point to the fact that Trump re-negotiated with both Mexico and Canada during his first term. But the CURRENT threats of tariffs have little to do with trade and more to do with FOREIGN POLICY COMMITMENTS.

JUST ONE of several different examples where Trump makes outlandish statements that totally reset the narrative. Making Canada our "51st state".



NATO members in Western Europe have drawn a torrent of criticism in recent years for failing to spend enough on defense and take their own national security seriously. It’s a fair charge, despite some recent improvements. Yet, one of the least responsible NATO members isn’t in Europe at all. It’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Canada.
In 2014, NATO members committed to a defense spending guideline of 2 percent of GDP. At the time, only three allies met this target. However, since Russia invaded Ukraine, many NATO countries have accelerated their commitments to increase defense spending, and most NATO members now hit this spending goal.
The Canadian government, however, is one of the few NATO allies that fails to meet the 2 percent defense expenditure threshold.
Canada isn’t a small country, nor is it a poor one. It’s perfectly capable of meeting its treaty obligations. Yet it spends a mere 1.37 percent of its GDP on defense, or roughly $30.5 billion a year. Despite having the sixth largest GDP among NATO countries, Canada ranks twenty-seventh in defense spending as a proportion of GDP. For comparison, the United States is the third-highest NATO member ranked in percentage of GDP (3.38 percent), behind only Poland and Estonia.
Canada is more than capable of meeting its obligations and has done so before. During the Cold War, Canada was a hugely capable NATO member whose contributions to deterring the Soviet Union were absolutely critical to hemispheric security.
The need to spend more on defense is particularly salient for Canada, as threats to NATO don’t only come from Eastern Europe. Canada also needs to take Arctic and North American security far more seriously as the Arctic emerges as a critical area of concern, rich in untapped resources and new navigation routes that are attracting attention from our adversaries.
China and Russia are actively increasing their presence in the Northern Pacific Ocean as they seek to expand into the Arctic. In late September, officials from both nations convened to form a “comprehensive strategic partnership” aimed at advancing their initiatives in the region. China describes itself as a “near Arctic” state (despite being nowhere near the Arctic) and has stated its intent to build a “Polar Silk Road.”
On September 28, the U.S. Coast Guard spotted Chinese and Russian coast guard ships near St. Lawrence Island in the Bering Sea, just south of the Arctic Circle. With increasing “near Arctic” encounters, Canada must bolster its defense against potential incursions from China and Russia along the Arctic coastline and not rely on the United States for Arctic security.
As Canadian Senator Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu put it:
“We can no longer ignore the threats to our sovereignty…Foreign powers are already testing our resolve, whether in the air through spy balloons or on the water through monitoring buoys. We are too dependent on the United States for Arctic defence—we must live up to our responsibilities as a northern country.”
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced plans to reach NATO’s 2 percent defense spending target. Yet these plans won’t have Canada hitting the target until 2032. This eight-year timeline is far too slow. No other NATO ally has submitted such a lackluster plan.
Trudeau’s priorities appear to lie elsewhere. His priorities for the Ministry of Defense have been to “build an inclusive and diverse” defense team, prioritizing the elimination of “anti-Black racism, LGBTQ2 prejudice, gender bias and white supremacy.” Prime Minister Trudeau would have done better to spend Canadian resources to strengthen Canada’s military readiness and ensure Canada could defend itself and its allies.
Canada’s continued underinvestment leaves its NATO obligations unmet and weakens the overall defense of both the alliance as a whole and the North American continent. Canadians deserve better.
 
Just read the police report in the local paper, turns out the new border security with the planes caught 5 illegals from Canada trying to cross from Manitoba into the states, and they were all from $hithole countries. This is in sparsely populated rural Manitoba. Just shows how many people are actually crossing and either not caught or reported. But sure thing, Canada doesn’t have any problems that we need to clean up.
 
Just read the police report in the local paper, turns out the new border security with the planes caught 5 illegals from Canada trying to cross from Manitoba into the states, and they were all from $hithole countries. This is in sparsely populated rural Manitoba. Just shows how many people are actually crossing and either not caught or reported. But sure thing, Canada doesn’t have any problems that we need to clean up.
This is a big thing for Trump.

There are international treaties that Canada was not even trying to uphold. Ditto Mexico. And the Trump Tariffs that were threatened were, in large part, based on these types of failures.

And 'round 2' of tariffs is up and coming, in terms of simple reciprocal tariffs. And the underfunding of NATO and the "buy Greenland" comments from Trump are simply part of his negotiating.

Yet, when reading mainstream headlines, it's almost comical to see the media say that Trump negotiated these deals last time he was President. Uh, no, not really. He negotiated other deals. And he did bring up the NATO problems first time around, but several nations fudged around and now they are going to find out. And Denmark (?) is putting $BILLION$ into Greenland defense now. And the EU is now upping the North Sea defenses that Denmark used to do. So the world will soon be a safer place as nations who actually committed to these treaties, some of which have been in existence for MANY DECADES prior to Trumps first term, actually step up and do what they said they would do.
 
Not a hockey guy here, but, I hear that the Canucks booed our Anthem, while we respected theirs. Typical liberal crap.
Then at the start of the game, in the first few minutes, the good ole boys whooped some Canadian ass, and then of course won the game.
 
Yes seen that, and heard of others doing it at different events, absolutely disgusting, a national anthem should never, ever be booed. Heard people were doing it at WHL games, the players are under 20 mostly, how pathetic. I told my kids to never do that, they are 11 and 13 but smarter than liberals.
 
I believe the Canadians boo'd our anthem at 4 different match ups.

I'd also suggest that it is in response to the misleading media headlines about Trump's tariffs.

Remember, when Trump addressed the World Economic Forum he offered ZERO tariffs.

And the room went silent.

That offer was to Canada too.

Now Europe is actually thinking about it after other nations are in panic mode.



High-ranking German conservative: EU should consider 0% tariffs on US

464e435a020e6393ec7b841a9440cdce4737643b-3077x2308.jpg
Jens Spahn. Annegret Hilse/Reuters.
Spahn’s suggestion has been floated before in European political circles, but his comments provide the latest signal as to how the likely incoming German administration could approach future negotiations with Trump.​
“If you start negotiating, you always can find a deal,” Spahn said, criticizing the current government’s approach to transatlantic relations, which he said was based on antagonism rather than trying to secure good terms. . . STORY CONTINUES AT LINK​
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc
The difference between the two countries is "choice". In Canada I CAN NOT carry a six shooter to the grocery store. In the USA I can IF I WANT TO (in most states as long as you follow the rules).

In the US I can purchase crappy government healthcare insurance for less than what I would pay in taxes in Canada IF I WANT TO. In Canada I HAVE to have crappy government healthcare insurance and can only get better insurance IF I WANT TO PAY FOR IT.

Choice ... it's a strange thing ... smells like, tastes like, and feels like ... freedom.
I think you hit upon something here and I just have to comment to add to your point.

The main cultural difference I see between the US and Canada comes down to where on the spectrum they fall between security and freedom. I would apply this to a lot of different peoples and countries as well, including across history.

Everyone wants both to feel safe and be provided for (security), while also wanting to feel like they control their own lives and destiny (freedom). History is really just the struggle between these two poles, because the problem is that you can't have fully one and the other at the same time.

Total security means you have no freedom. Imagine you lived in a prison cell, but all your meals and little creature comforts were provided for you. You were never in danger, never hungry, never cold, never afraid. But you could not leave, because doing so might put you at risk. That is total security.

Now imagine you lived in the wilderness, and every day was a struggle for survival. You could do whatever you wanted and go wherever you wanted, all simply limited by your own abilities, and nothing else. Fear, hunger, cold, conflict with others, was all part of life everyday, but you were free. Nobody to tell you what you can and can't do. That is total freedom.

Which is better? Both extremes have obvious drawbacks, so we strive for some kind of happy medium, but a perfect balance is very hard to achieve, so we inevitably tend toward one more than the other.

I would argue that Canadians, as a whole, err toward the side of security. While Americans, as a whole, err toward the side of freedom.

I, for one, would rather err toward freedom. I would rather face some risk and uncertainty in life, rather than feel too constrained. Freedom is more important to me than security, because I would rather face fears than be ruled by them. And probably most Americans agree with me, but most Canadians believe the opposite, and thus the difference in the two countries' respective cultures, and downstream from that, in their politics and governments.

Which side of politics a person ends up on usually comes down to this question then: Given a choice, what is more important to you: Security or Freedom?
 
Top