Canadians don’t feel strongly enough to go through the hassle of rewriting our Constitution.

Considering Trudeaus favorability ratings are currently like, -30, it’s actually significantly more popular than Trudeau himself, which makes me skeptical that the driving force really is just a dislike of Trudeau

I think that’s exactly the explanation of how the driving force really is just a dislike of Trudeau. The CPC has done a good job of tainting it as “Trudeau’s Carbon Tax”. The Environment is a top issue for Canadians. This is just anecdotal, but I live in a rural, conservative area and while you get a lot of ignorance or just hatred of any type of tax, you also get some people who logically understand how it works but simply hate it because it’s tied to Trudeau.

That’s not the article’s fault. I’m almost certain Ukraine is going to keep those numbers close to the chest for OPSEC.

For anyone who doesn’t get this comment https://youtu.be/Q-25c8Rsobw

Great comparison, a dialect used by millions of people to a dead language. It really shows how much you care about the people who speak that dialect…

Having a Québécois convenience store company try to take over a Japenese convenience store company, who recently took over an American convenience store company just feels like the crazy future capitalism presented us but never fulfilled. Instead, we’re usually just dealing with late-stage capitalism.

Fine, but this was in England, where there are speedlimits everywhere and there is an ocean channel between it and the closest place without speedlimits.

As a Canadian, I read 141 and thought, “141 km/h is pretty fast, but that’s not international news fast.” Then I saw it was mph!

Driving that fast on a closed course while sober with complete focus is dangerous. Yet this guy was drunk and texting on public roads.

“Sometimes mistakes happen," he said. "But I’m not a bad person.”

AFAIK, no mistakes happened, those were all choices. And by making those choices, yes, you are a bad person.

I think you watch too many movies. From my experience serving in the CAF alongside the infantry, all the actions you describe would not be condoned and anyone taking those actions would be charged. Maybe I’m biased, but I was always told the goal of our operations were “capturing hearts and minds” which would be in direct conflict with taking terrorist actions.

Russia and the US have committed war crimes in their invasions of Ukraine and Iraq respectively, but the general consensus is that their militaries are still not terrorist organizations.

War Crimes != Terrorism. Some acts qualify as both, but words have meanings, and I think it’s important we recognize that. I don’t think the actions of the US in Iran would make a reasonable person say the US Military is a terrorist organization, though they are definitely harbouring some war criminals.

I think the other thing is asking, what’s the value in labelling an organization? Telling your friend with a substance problem that they’re an addict/alcoholic might just drive them away and towards worse influences. Or telling off your toxic coworker might be cathartic, but it’ll probably just make the situation worse.

PS I’m pretty sure labelling the IDF as “similarly abhorrent” isn’t very helpful.

I’m not sure what you mean by “spreading terror”. IMHO, most actions that would meet those requirements are war crimes.

We can debate whether pretty much any law is moral in our own opinion. However, I think laws are a good place to start with what rules should be followed. They can be changed/updated as necessary.

I think the big difference is whether the force follows the rules of war or not. Obviously the CAF has had some violations, but not on an organisational level like the IRGC.

That’s pretty standard for the BBC. They know where most of their audiences are, so they rarely mention the local currency.

For each count of not paying the helper’s salary no later than seven days after it was due, Wu could have been jailed for up to a year, fined up to S$10,000, or both.

Instead she received no jail time and one S$10,000 fine when there were dozens of counts.

I actually do think EV range will come down in price faster than inflation, and probably at a pretty significant rate too. I just think the the $15K, 350mi EV is unlikely to ever exist because:

• The other basic components of a car have a cost, and that’s increasing because of inflation, but also increased safety standards and the additional “standard” options the industry pushes. I think the price of a car before the drive-train is getting pretty close to that $15K.
• Bigger battery packs have less range efficiency because they have to haul around the rest of the battery. People keep pointing out the BYD Dolphin is sold in China for the equivalent of <$15K, but the base range is 187mi, meaning a 350mi range would need significantly more than double the batteries.
• I expect (or at least hope) that range will become less of an issue as charging gets better and more ubiquitous, and owners get used to charging at home. I know some people actually do need 350mi+ range, but I think that’s pretty rare so high range cars won’t have the economies of scale that cheap, mainstream goods get.

Well, since you asked:

• The base range is 187mi. You’re going to need to spend more if you want the 252mi range.
• That’s the price in China. It costs thousands of dollars to move a vehicle halfway across the world. There’s a reason the price is Australia and Europe is significantly higher!

Your council works too slowly. Here’s the fix:

The first mobile cost about $4000

I said a decade ago, not the very first. I also should have said “smartphone”. Powering cars by battery isn’t a brand new technology.

The original cars cost 30k adjusted for inflation with the cheapest today costing around 15.

I was responding to a meme that said $15K, not $15K (inflation adjusted).

Vehicles aren’t just one technology though, they are commodity items. Cellphones are more expensive than a decade ago, so are laptops. The average ICE car has gotten much more expensive over time. So, do you think EV technologies will get significantly cheaper quicker than inflation and the general direction of the industry?

100% agree! I’m wondering if I should have clarified in my original comment that $15K EVs might be possible without ridiculous subsidies, but they aren’t going to have a 350mi range.