leh-nerd skin-erd

How many thousands are you thinking? 2,000? 3,000? 12,000? And are you concerned generally about mandated expenses, or just the Trump tariff version? Because…I’m thinking a reduction on govt mandated tax would go along way to softening the blow. Income, sales, excise, etc…

I’m not looking to be argumentative, but the truckers were protesting their treatment by your government. The decisions made, and the question of a heavy-handed government prone to overreach is a Canada problem As for MAGA contributing to the cause, I’m not certain if that’s true or not, but it’s irrelevant. You mentioned your version of freedom v our version of freedom a couple posts up…I would think we would both agree that supporting causes that are important to you is a fundamental right in both our countries. Finally with respect to Alberta, oil/gas/minerals/lumber, if enough citizens in that province feel the government is working against them, it becomes a problem. It sounds to me that you’re concerned about Alberta because of oil/gas/minerals/lumber and maybe less concerned with regulations and overreach. That puts you at odds with them, not Trump or MAGA.

It’s incredible to me that the window between life and death was 15 seconds. Rationally, we know that many tragedies result from people doing/failing to do something in a very short period of time, but when you consider a collision between an airplane and helicopter it seems almost incomprehensible. Thanks for the continued feedback on this horrible tragedy.

“Alright….Thank you….ok.” from the interviewer at the end is hysterical.

Trump has been in office for 100 days. Your contention is one of your provinces looking to secede after a little over three months is a Trump issue? That doesn’t sound right.

You suggested “…provinces leaving…” as it relates to Trump. What did you mean by that?

With respect to Carney, he sounds like the pudgy little brother of the tough guy down the street, everyone calls him Stinky. He doesn't like being called Stinky, he wants to play with the big kids, he wants respect...but he's got to earn that. That is completely independent of whatever Trump says or does. He didn't suggest he was taking on Trump, he suggested he was taking on all Americans. To a certain extent, you present as if you have a little bit of an inferiority complex. What does Trump's rhetoric have to do with "provinces leaving"? With 'bowing'? If Canadians feel they are being treated unfairly, seek other means of redress. Hold the line. Find other trade partners. You've taken the important first step and elected a guy to lead you forward. All of this truly comes from the heart, without malice. I have great fondness for Canada and Canadians generally. You want things the way they were. The current admin feels it needs to change. If they can get together and work it out--which seems the most sensible thing to do, we all move on.

On this, we can agree.

On the other hand, perhaps the people in India will seize the moment, and this opportunity to improve the lives of its citizens. We know what happens in China, and the fact that you feel like they suck less than India doesn't mean it needs to be that way. Either way, you still get easy access to your lawyer porn, where "OVERRULED!" takes on a whole new meaning.

I don't do any of that, Bill, but I'm not an American (or Canadian) politician. I did fib about writing down Roundy's name on an old envelope, it was actually on the back of an old napkin with a water ring on it. Call your new boy up and tell him to stand down on the rhetoric about taking on "the Americans". That sounds quite ominous indeed. As for Amazon, they were evil before because, you know, billionaires and fair share. You gotta keep up, even with the language barrier between yours and mine. I reject the premise that he is trying to 'destroy the US and the world's economy'. That is all.

Sure, you're the only one who really understands things. As for declaring bankruptcy, geez, given the condition of our federal government, Trump's past experience with the court system probably makes him uniquely qualified to operate in a system where there's massive amount of money flowing in, but always an incessant need for more. Yet, here is is, trying to reduce waste and fraud and the wasters and fraudsters with their fingers in the pie are saying "Too Much! Too Soon!" and lots of democrat supporters struggle to understand why this makes an awful lot of sense.

I think pollution is addressed through sensible regulation based on current scientific theory, analyzed periodically for relevance as technology changes. Then again, I don't believe what you do. If I did, I'd look at the world and begin to eliminate any non-essential industry and the pollution resulting from same. If I believed as you did, I'd be looking at, say, the NFL, the massive carbon foot print produced by it and the egregious harm to the environment. While exceedingly popular, the number of people impacted that do not follow or derive benefit from it dwarves those who do on a global basis. Charging a few extra buckets per ticket, or assessing tax on the league doesn't change that which we know to be true---it's a huge drain on the environment. This is why your name went on my list. The good news for you, or course, is that I have already misplaced the paperwork and it's as if the list never existed. That makes zero sense. As hard-working immigrants looking for a better way of life, why couldn't they just cross into Canada via the nearest border crossing, set up shop in a local motel covered by the Canadian government, and just make it happen? You know, just show up?

Fair enough, but he doesn't represent NYC in this case (and I'd argue that attempting to seize control of the Times Square Hilton brings with it certain challenges and legalities and most people would not support it), and growth in leadership isn't a bad thing.

I recognize we won't agree, but civility carried the day. "Diplomacy not being his strong suit" to me would be "We're on the wrong side of the trade deal, and the Canadian leadership has taken advantage of us for far too long" in whatever way DJT would say that. Or, maybe something like "We're getting screwed, and screw that!". "Diplomacy not being his strong suit" does not include "We're going to absorb your country" or anything close to that. As a quick, irreverent one-liner, probably not all that presidential but harmless. Going on about it when it's never going to happen, just gets old.

Again, it’s your contention that the world is at the point of no return, not mine. The fact that plantation owners paid for slaves doesn’t change the fact that it was morally, spiritually and ethically repugnant. You supporting a “pay to pollute” scheme reveals the main problem with the movement—screaming from the mountain top that the end of the world is nigh while living a consumption-based lifestyle that clearly flies in contrast with your message points.

Carbon tax is a scheme to move money from the group who has it, to those who want it. The absurd notion that some of the climate hypocrisy deniers put forth---that they can offset their pollution by paying to pollute is just one such example of abject stupidity. If the world is at a tipping point, "firms who pollute" should be dealt with harshly, efficiently, and with a strong message to those that might one day pollute. Come to think of it--your complicity in the destruction of our climate should be noted. I'm writing it down on the back of an envelope that included some junk mail.

There are many aspects of the Trump presidency that are admirable. I believe his ability to face down and overcome almost insurmountable odds is the stuff of legends, and if he's ultimately successful books will be written about his strength and resolve. I think you're overestimating him for pre-planning the eventual fall of our neighbors to the north. If I'm being completely honest, I would prefer this sort of irrelevant rhetoric be directed at true enemies of freedom than at one of our allies. On the other hand, if you're correct and there is a grand plan here to undermine Canadian leadership, there are far better ways to communicate the message point than that we're going to absorb the country into ours. It's unnecessary.

I disagree with your premise and suggestion that there is a parasitic relationship. Each country should act in its best interest, but taking one small example—tourism is good. The flow of goods across the border is of mutual benefit. On a local, micro level—Canadians coming across the border to support the Bills is good for us, and for them. I think the Canadian affinity for speedos is bad, quite in fact, but beyond that, the rest can be worked out. Getting back to Frank’s question, Trump’s continued commentary on 51st State is bad.

The 51st state comment was humorous as a one-off, but ultimately disrespectful and silly. That said, would you acknowledge the average American (and most posters here), know very little about politics in Canada, the players in the game and how their system operates? From a purely personal perspective, with Canadian relatives and having spent considerable time across the bridge—-I’d like to see a respectful, mutually beneficial and peaceful co-existence. The new guy says he wants to “take on the Americans”, so let’s see where that takes us. Perhaps we’ll ultimately get to the bottom of debate about fair trade and mutual benefit.

Breasty Chesterton, the exotic dancer? It sounds dirty if you ask me.

It wasn’t very nice, and I felt bad for Sanders. Still, they’re kids, and kids are not always nice.

Drinking the drinks Americans won’t drink?

In addition, the fact that he was undergoing cancer treatment does not preclude him from advising his superiors that he will be out of the office for a few days. I’m sure there are places one can work with loosey goosey standards where unexplained absences are encouraged, but a phone call to the office is a pretty low bar to cover one’s bases.

Imagine you’re at a backyard party*, you meet the friend of friend somewhere between the burgers and the table with the deviled eggs. You ask him, “What do you do, Zeke?” while looking for the beer cooler and trying to make sure your child isn’t causing a ruckus over near the bounce house. Zeke replies, “From the White House to White House, Texas, I carry the light the world over”. I think most people immediately think “Oh, great, I gotta be standing next to this d*uche.” *This is not at @Joe Ferguson forever house

The Europeans won’t side with the US, and that’s their right. However, the Russians annexed Crimea in 2014. What have they done to assist Ukraine, or significantly pressure Russia to return annexed lands in the 11 years since this all went down? Besides the devious plot to drive Putin to his knees by buying his fossil fuels, of course.