Pit Bull

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

Estimated 3 minutes
📷
Thank you CBC NEWS for the following :

What pisses me off , where was the Liberal Government's consideration towards Canadian "Jobs & Employment. It would be interesting to know how much the exchange rate was on 989 million dollars. As I understand an example of @25 % would be around 247.25 million all Canadian taxpayers monies going into an American an economy and American jobs. I could uneaten if there weren't any rail passenger train manufactures in Canada I suppose they forgot about Bombardier or did they.

The Government's practices of Canadian governance is not applicable to compliances under any Free Trade Agreements, it's mention is to deflect?

Via Rail places $989M train order with Germany's Siemens instead of Bombardier
German company will build the trains in its California facility

The Canadian Press · Posted: Dec 12, 2018 1:28 PM EST | Last Updated: December 12, 2018
Play
📷
Listen to this article
Via Rail has selected German manufacturer Siemens to deliver the 32 new trains it needs to maintain capacity between Quebec City and Windsor, Ont. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)

Social Sharing
Via Rail has selected Germany's Siemens over Bombardier Inc. for a $989-million contract to build new rolling stock as the Canadian passenger rail service renews its fleet of locomotives and cars for the rail corridor between Quebec City and Windsor, Ont.

The company confirmed the contract, which will see trains built at its North American manufacturing hub in Sacramento, Calif.
Deliveries will begin in 2021 for entry into service the following year.
Succession and Dynasty collide
Book Now
📷

📷
Ads by
Send feedbackWhy this ad?
Ads by

Send feedbackWhy this ad?
Not interested in this ad
Ad was inappropriate
Seen this ad multiple times
Ad covered content
Thanks. Feedback improves Google ads

Thanks. Feedback improves Google ads
Ad closed by

Ad closed by
Via Rail and Siemens also announced a 15-year technical services and parts agreement valued at $355.5 million.

"As we are initiating the gradual withdrawal of the current fleet, the timely delivery of the new fleet will allow Via Rail to maintain the current levels of service in the Québec City – Windsor Corridor, while significantly improving the quality of its passenger experience," said Via Rail chief executive Yves Desjardins-Siciliano in a statement.
Siemens's light rail systems are in use in Edmonton and Calgary.
Fair game with fair trade rules
The Canadian rail company requires 32 new trains to maintain its current capacity of 9,100 seats. The equipment must be able to run on electricity once that is installed along the route.
Bombardier may lay off hundreds at its Quebec railway plant if no orders come in
Federal Transport Minister Marc Garneau has said the decision to bypass Bombardier and workers at its plant in La Pocatiere, Que., is justified, because Canada's free trade agreements with the European Union and the United States don't allow Via Rail to favour Bombardier in the awarding of contracts.
Asked to comment on his previous promise to use all of his influence to make Via Rail change its mind about going with Siemens, Quebec's Economy Minister Pierre Fitzgibbon said he got involved late in the process but plans to learn how to better support Quebec companies next time around.
"The influence I had didn't work, but certainly I'm going to — from a post-mortem perspective — look at what could have been done differently to protect our Quebec and Canadian content," he said in an interview with CBC News.
Fitzgibbon said he'd be meeting with Via's Desjardins-Siciliano in the new year.
Bombardier on track to deliver on turnaround goals, CEO says
Although the trains will be made in the United States, the deal is with the company's Canadian division, Siemens Canada, which the company says employs 4,300 people at 44 Canadian locations.
Siemens says its trains will offer passengers a quieter, smoother and more accessible ride, with carbon emissions as much as 80 per cent lower than the current fleet.
With files from CBC News

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@its_Mona02 DAY

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@Barron_trump1_1 09486

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@_brownie0_ Hockey

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@0DonaldTrumpJr1 55

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@VelvetSuns55579 Lobster 🦀

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@its_Mona02 Fee.

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

Lets use the world's timeline and go back into the West's recent history. For the purpose of identifcation we'll use a timeline to pin-point and identify a point in time when and where our hidden problems started too surface was on the same timeline we all were "made to be not aware of things that were actually going on around us all? We all failed to recognized the issues/matters/problems that we now recognize. One of these problems was/is PMS Mark Carney. In his own words that he said he was not a politician, not that the truth matters, Carney knows how gullible Canadians really are? He was never questioned about his affiliation with Klaus Schwab a man representing World Economics Forum Ideologies. Klaus publicly admitted his group had penetrated "Young Justin Cabinet, never any news whether whether this was never investigate nor was it ever talked about on the floor, OH it was but the Speaker manage to cover it up. Carney has probably spent more time running Canada from Air-Farse Canada #1 than the amount of time that he has sat on the Floor of our Parliament?

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

When you turn left instead of right.

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

I got to wondcering, so I "ASKED" Thanks Elon. Mr. Grok, what the time line was is a void, some years back in Canada where there was an off shoot party of New Democratic Party ( NDP ), the party was the NDP Waffle Party, who best as I recall were individuals within the NDP who wanted Canada to pull away from American dependecy. In my life this subject didn't much matter I had the exact job that my Father had when he retired. Lot's of things have changed but I do wonder what the relationship would be to day had the concept of less dependentcy had taken more of a hold in Canada. Can AI speculate what things would look like had Canada completely pulled away from the USA?

The Waffle was a left-nationalist faction inside the NDP from 1969 into the early 1970s, not a governing party. Its leaders were economist Mel Watkins and James Laxer. Their 1969 Manifesto for an Independent Socialist Canada argued that the main threat to Canada was American corporate control of the economy: Canada had become a resource hinterland and consumer market inside what they called the American empire, with key decisions made in U.S. boardrooms. They wanted socialism and independence together—public ownership of the “commanding heights” (resources, finance, and strategic industries), national planning of investment, and workers’ influence over production. They also treated Quebec as a distinct nation. Economic independence without socialism, they said, would be empty. They lost the fight inside the NDP. A milder version of their concerns did appear later: the Watkins Report on foreign ownership (1968), the Foreign Investment Review Agency, Petro-Canada, and the 1980 National Energy Program. Those measures reduced some U.S. ownership in energy but also produced Western alienation, capital flight in the oil patch, and political backlash. After 1984 Canada chose the opposite path: the 1988 free-trade deal, NAFTA, and CUSMA. That is the Canada that actually exists.
What “completely pulled away” would have required
A full break—nationalizing large U.S.-owned firms, sharply restricting new American investment, and turning away from the U.S. market—would have been far more radical than anything Ottawa ever tried. Geography works against it. Most Canadians live close to the border; the two economies grew complementary supply chains in autos, energy, parts, and agri-food rather than parallel ones. Today the United States still takes roughly three-quarters of Canadian merchandise exports and remains both the largest investor in Canada and the largest destination for Canadian investment abroad. Bilateral trade runs in the high hundreds of billions of dollars a year. A serious 1970s rupture would have needed east-west pipelines and ports built much earlier, new markets found while Canada’s population and industrial base were smaller, and a willingness to accept slower capital formation and technology transfer.
A grounded counterfactual
If the Waffle idea of less dependency had taken deeper root and been applied more consistently (not a total seal-off, which was never realistic), Canada in 2026 would likely differ in these ways:Living standards and industry. Average incomes would probably be lower. Integration raised productivity and consumer choice; most studies of the free-trade era find net gains even after adjustment costs. A more closed, state-directed model would have faced capital flight and slower adoption of some technologies. Manufacturing might have been less of a branch-plant economy and more focused on processing resources at home, at the cost of scale. The auto sector would look very different—smaller, more protected, less tightly tied to https://t.co/OOnuCTTYYH and regions. Stronger public control of oil and gas could have produced an earlier east-west energy system or a heavier tilt to hydro and nuclear, closer to a Norwegian-style resource fund than to the boom-and-bust spending pattern that actually occurred. Alberta’s cycle would have been different; Western alienation would still exist but around different flashpoints. Federal-provincial fights over resources would have been a permanent high-stakes feature of politics, as they already were under the NEP. Politics and daily life.Canada would have been less automatically aligned with U.S. security and trade priorities. Cultural protectionism would have been heavier. Consumer goods would have been more expensive and less varied. Cross-border commuting, tourism, and professional networks would have been thinner. A larger public sector and more Crown corporations would have changed the mix of jobs—more security in some industries, less dynamism in others. Whether social programs would be stronger depends on whether the economy generated enough surplus to pay for them.The binding constraint. Complete pull-away was never geographically realistic without a large drop in living standards. Canada is a high-income country of roughly 40 million next to a market of 340 million. The Waffle’s lasting insight was political: dependence creates vulnerability when Washington changes course. That point has returned whenever U.S. policy turns protectionist. The real choice was never pure independence versus pure integration. It was how much sovereignty a mid-sized, resource-rich, elongated country could buy without paying too high a price in prosperity.The path Canada took produced high average living standards and recurring complaints about lack of control. A stronger Waffle path would have produced more national control over investment and resources and less material convenience. Which mix looks better depends on whether one values control or living standards more. Both futures contain real trade-offs.

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@its_Mona02 Not to day?

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@elonrocketMre74 The cut is diamond or straight cut?

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@0Maria_B for pocket change holder

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@BarronTrump_RVQ 16 holes

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

I got to wondcering, so I "ASKED" Thanks Elon. Mr. Grok, what the time line was is a void, some years back in Canada where there was an off shoot party of New Democratic Party ( NDP ), the party was the NDP Waffle Party, who best as I recall were individuals within the NDP who wanted Canada to pull away from American dependecy. In my life this subject didn't much matter I had the exact job that my Father had when he retired. Lot's of things have changed but I do wonder what the relationship would be to day had the concept of less dependentcy had taken more of a hold in Canada. Can AI speculate what things would look like had Canada completely pulled away from the USA?

The Waffle was a left-nationalist faction inside the NDP from 1969 into the early 1970s, not a governing party. Its leaders were economist Mel Watkins and James Laxer. Their 1969 Manifesto for an Independent Socialist Canada argued that the main threat to Canada was American corporate control of the economy: Canada had become a resource hinterland and consumer market inside what they called the American empire, with key decisions made in U.S. boardrooms. They wanted socialism and independence together—public ownership of the “commanding heights” (resources, finance, and strategic industries), national planning of investment, and workers’ influence over production. They also treated Quebec as a distinct nation. Economic independence without socialism, they said, would be empty. They lost the fight inside the NDP. A milder version of their concerns did appear later: the Watkins Report on foreign ownership (1968), the Foreign Investment Review Agency, Petro-Canada, and the 1980 National Energy Program. Those measures reduced some U.S. ownership in energy but also produced Western alienation, capital flight in the oil patch, and political backlash. After 1984 Canada chose the opposite path: the 1988 free-trade deal, NAFTA, and CUSMA. That is the Canada that actually exists.
What “completely pulled away” would have required
A full break—nationalizing large U.S.-owned firms, sharply restricting new American investment, and turning away from the U.S. market—would have been far more radical than anything Ottawa ever tried. Geography works against it. Most Canadians live close to the border; the two economies grew complementary supply chains in autos, energy, parts, and agri-food rather than parallel ones. Today the United States still takes roughly three-quarters of Canadian merchandise exports and remains both the largest investor in Canada and the largest destination for Canadian investment abroad. Bilateral trade runs in the high hundreds of billions of dollars a year. A serious 1970s rupture would have needed east-west pipelines and ports built much earlier, new markets found while Canada’s population and industrial base were smaller, and a willingness to accept slower capital formation and technology transfer.
A grounded counterfactual
If the Waffle idea of less dependency had taken deeper root and been applied more consistently (not a total seal-off, which was never realistic), Canada in 2026 would likely differ in these ways:Living standards and industry. Average incomes would probably be lower. Integration raised productivity and consumer choice; most studies of the free-trade era find net gains even after adjustment costs. A more closed, state-directed model would have faced capital flight and slower adoption of some technologies. Manufacturing might have been less of a branch-plant economy and more focused on processing resources at home, at the cost of scale. The auto sector would look very different—smaller, more protected, less tightly tied to https://t.co/OOnuCTTYYH and regions. Stronger public control of oil and gas could have produced an earlier east-west energy system or a heavier tilt to hydro and nuclear, closer to a Norwegian-style resource fund than to the boom-and-bust spending pattern that actually occurred. Alberta’s cycle would have been different; Western alienation would still exist but around different flashpoints. Federal-provincial fights over resources would have been a permanent high-stakes feature of politics, as they already were under the NEP. Politics and daily life.Canada would have been less automatically aligned with U.S. security and trade priorities. Cultural protectionism would have been heavier. Consumer goods would have been more expensive and less varied. Cross-border commuting, tourism, and professional networks would have been thinner. A larger public sector and more Crown corporations would have changed the mix of jobs—more security in some industries, less dynamism in others. Whether social programs would be stronger depends on whether the economy generated enough surplus to pay for them.The binding constraint. Complete pull-away was never geographically realistic without a large drop in living standards. Canada is a high-income country of roughly 40 million next to a market of 340 million. The Waffle’s lasting insight was political: dependence creates vulnerability when Washington changes course. That point has returned whenever U.S. policy turns protectionist. The real choice was never pure independence versus pure integration. It was how much sovereignty a mid-sized, resource-rich, elongated country could buy without paying too high a price in prosperity.The path Canada took produced high average living standards and recurring complaints about lack of control. A stronger Waffle path would have produced more national control over investment and resources and less material convenience. Which mix looks better depends on whether one values control or living standards more. Both futures contain real trade-offs.

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

More now than ever.

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

Special Message to Doug Ford and Mark Carney, want to piss of Donald Trump big time, find the Artist who did this statue and ask him if you can buy it, whole lot cheaper than a football commercial or ask if the statue can be rented. If either option is available take it and park it the north entrance with bill board stating the each country's daily losses.

Probably would support feeding the Pigeons or something like that.

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

We have a deal (the present deal) that was agreed to that ends 2036 that was satisfactory up until Trump pull off and started all this bull shit. I don't recall there being any tariff violations pending or being argued Bidens realm/turn. Trump's doing what thinks is legal and if the courts thinks otherwise they can take his ruling to court and if the courts disagree with his ruling Mr. Trump will blame the courts because he was only trying to make America Great Again? Sadly this will happen things don't change replacing them with Democrats be a mistake, talk about being up Shit Creek with out a paddle ..........,

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

Right now, everybody that's a nobody which means those involved are ones, what they are doing is not any one's business whatsoever until is over. Any negotator worth will tell you tell you to keep your pie hole shut as there isn't anyone's thinking from all sides that should be made public, those that thinks otherwise is the reason for this all to begin with. Everyone go to their respective corners with their tails between legs. Lots will happen in the next ten years just look at what has taken place in Canada over the last ten years what exactly have they really done other than put Canada under more dept?

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@BeautifulCana1 This woman it not worth listening to she would steel the air your kids breath while they sleep, her ideologies do not fall very far from her personal beliefs?

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

Maybe maybe not, the world is changing and changing very fast and for what? A question worth persuing? Some how the world is no longer interested in world peace unless there $$$$$.$$ to be made. The world has a mad man that's want's to take over a continent to prove what, and for what purpose, the question will this tariff war that Trump started, "will it ever be forgotten by Candians, pending how far things go? What's going to happen is something the was going to happen sooner or later at some point/juncture. We can not perdict the future. Canada and the USA will never be partners, one can never partner with another if one seeks total control cure that and you have found the answer, something going to be very hard to accomplish?

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

@WeAreCanProud This fine but I want a time 72 hours before qand after where everyone is?

[Pit Bull @PitBull76343428]

It will only be a matter time, Trump turned away the last time Carney agreed with what the American wanted, what North America has to come to grips with is fact that if this that Donald created this problem, should the new agreement not take place the exidstingb agreementv runs until 2036?