[flagged]
You are calling for the invasion of your own country? Surely you realize that is a very fringe view.
Invasion? nope, totally voluntarily.
Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
221–230 of 355 posts
Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
#222Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are calling for the invasion of your own country? Surely you realize that is a very fringe view.
There is such an echo chamber among the Albertan far right that they fail to see exactly what a fringe community they are. Unfortunately they have deep pockets because of funding from the US.
not from alberta.
Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
Canadians certainly have differing opinions on politics however it's definitely a tiny minority that share your opinion on being happy if Canada became part of the USA.
It's all quite preposterous because many Canadians would probably have been fine in the past with some kind of currency union and trade and enhanced labour mobility if such a thing had been proposed during e.g. the Obama years. At that point our currencies were often at par, the two governments were generally very friendly, and trade was going rather well. Canadians would probably welcome increased competition and se…
anything that brings value of my money back where travel to Maui was affordable.
Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why should we be borrowing all this money from foreigners when we’re a rich country? The crazy thing is, most of the money that the US borrows from is from their own citizens... not foreigners. I don't know why everyone presumes that US debt is mostly or entirely owed to other countries. It isn't.
Why doesn't the US just print money instead of having to borrow money then print it? does any other country do it this way?
Taking out a loan and promising to repay it is a voluntary exchange of value that markets are comfortable with -- to issue debt is to play by the rules. Printing money directly is just an exercise in pissing on the users of that currency. People don't want to use currencies that do that. When people buy US debt, they are implicitly validating their trust in the currency to be paid back later.
Some other countries have simply tried to print their way out of deficits, usually it doesn't end well. Zimbabwe is my favorite example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_Zimbabwe
Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just curious, what's the reason for it needing to be 13 states?
There are 10 provinces and 3 territories. Most of the provinces could make states, PEI and territories are too small. Making Canada one huge state would be stupid, even more than annexing Canada.
The territories are enormous. And since under the American system, land, not people get votes, they should absolutely have 2 senators each.
Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
> like the number of mass shootings. Some stats I think your link doesn't have actual mass shootings number, my bet is that majority of fire arm homicides are commited by some small caliber hangguns (unlikely to be restricted) in domestic violence setting. Wikipedia says that massshooting casualties are only 0.2% of gun deaths in USA.
My point was really that American style gun rights are not popular in Canada, and the theoretical tyrannical government isn't an adequate justification. You can argue the merits for or against, but more than 60% of Canadians support outright bans on firearms, and more than 80% support bans on 'assault' weapons. This is not a hugely controversial topic in Canada; personally I support hunting, and recognize the utility…
Its usually not hugely controversial, but there is that small minority here too...
Some points I feel compelled to make:
About 52% of URBAN voters support outright firearm bans but that number goes down when rural is added. I've always believed regulations for urban and rural environments should be different when it comes to firearms.
The vaguely defined "assault" weapons clarification always draws criticism so i'm going to avoid it. Personally I support banning fully automatic weapons, concealed/shortened shotguns, high capacity drum magazines, bump stocks and other items that exist to increase lethality in ways that cannot be justified for sport or hunting purposes. I also support restricting handguns, restricting magazine sizes, and other regulations. Most people that are against assault weapons I personally talk to agree the looks aren't the problem its the capabilities. Tacticool is fine, any gun being used for a crime will be scary. My point is that there is a lot that can and can't be included in 'assault' weapons, and everyone has their own list of what they do and don't think applies, so that 80% number isn't homogonized on what they are supporting.
We both 100% agree its a privilege that should be earned not a right. Testing and responsible ownership are requirements of keeping that privilege. Steps need to be taken to ensure that volatile domestic or mental health situations that are known to police and communities aren't left to fester with easy access to weapons. We also need to focus on illegal guns crossing our border from the south.
Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
> to a logic and data based restriction approach and what would data tell why guns have to be restricted? Some questions: - what the fraction of gun crimes are commited by law-abiding citizens, which would be actually subject of restrictions? - is number of casualties high compared to casualties from knife fights, over-doze, obesity, and car accidents because of speeding Is there data for this question which would ba…
>and what would data tell why guns have to be restricted? We have banned, restricted, and unrestricted classifications. There are good arguments for fully automatic weapons, concealable shotguns and handguns being at least restricted, and for fully automatic and concealable weapons to be completely banned. I'm not going to rehash the arguments, because frankly we're likely going to disagree on most of them and neithe…
> and equipment vastly outclasses what any civilian can and will have even in the US.
not really. In urban setting, it is still the same soldier on foot with rifle, unless military decides to level all cities in the country.
Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
China only has one currency, the renminbi or yuan. There are capital controls so it isn't fully traded on international markets. It has only been internationally traded since 2015, and I think there were various schemes before that.
Aren't CNY and CNH effectively two different currencies, despite having the same name and being somewhat linked?
I hadn't noticed that. I guess that is how they manage the capital controls. It sounds like they are supposed to be the same internally but that there is a spread. That seems like it could be a weakness.
Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
No crime is ever committed by law abiding citizen, by definition. That being said, lawfully acquired guns are routinelly used in crimes. Plus, they make gun owning men (specifically) much more successful at killing themselves. Plus they cause accidents. Guns are waay more likely to be used by tyrants supporters then by anybody else. Case in point, republicans support president dismantling democracy and own more guns.
> lawfully acquired guns are routinelly used in crimes. They are literally almost never used in crime. So “routinely” is false. In fact, I would guess that 99.9% of lawfully acquired guns in America are only ever used in lawful ways. > Case in point, republicans support president dismantling democracy Democracy is not being dismantled. If you’re an American citizen, you still have the right to vote however you want.…
[deleted]
Re: Canada considering charging for road access from USA to Alaska
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
the american standard of living would collapse if america could not run deficits. in the very long term, like in 50 years, it might actually be better for america, but this generation of americans would be hurt big time.
Why? How? The US balanced the budget under Clinton. I was pretty young, but I don't remember the standard of living collapsing in the early 90s (quite the opposite in fact).
for a few years only, and with tiny surpluses compared to deficits that came before and after. and the deficits exploded again.
I can hold my breath for a few seconds, but not for a 10 minutes. it is like that.
and that is only the federal deficit. local governments are also running massive deficits.