I'm also for this, yes. I agree that the protectionism has done us no good.

Nobody's asking to DEPEND on China, but we already import a shittonne of stuff from them, why not cars? The whole point is to untether ourselves from any industry or nation that demands that we go all-in on them. That means we import Chinese cars while they're a good deal. If they stop being good for us, we'll import something else. Or build something else. But the status quo is busted as hell.

Yeah, and range is reduced in an ICE vehicle in the winter too. The cold spares no mechanism. (Diesel is further set back because of the additives that are put in to prevent the fuel from gelling in the tank. That starts even before it gets cold.)

I don't dispute either of these things. And Cretien/Martin slashed the budget and balanced it...but set the stage for decades of housing under-development by stopping the CMHC from building social housing like they used to. Stephen Harper ALSO failed to balance the budget except when he was HANDED a balanced budget.

Again, both these parties are truly awful. We really need a proportional system so we don't end up with 4 years of bozos replaced eventually by some other bozo for another 4 year kick at the can.

I'm a fan of union jobs, but I think we might have to let this fight go. The tariffs on Chinese EVs means that a lot of our farmers are getting demolished by counter-tariffs on canola and whatnot. There's a tradeoff to be made here, and given that we really should be moving away from ICE vehicles, we may need to bite the bullet and wind down car manufacturing here. Or get some Chinese companies to set up shop so we can move the workers to those.

You ever tried to start a petrol or diesel car in -40? I hope you plugged it in overnight, or it's not going anywhere. So no matter what, you have to plug your car in when it's -40C.

A mechanical engineer can probably answer this better than me, but I'd wager that the sheer number of moving parts in a normal ICE vehicle means that -40 is actually much worse them than for an EV. I know from experience riding bicycles (in Edmonton) in the winter that basically nothing works properly below -30C. The grease doesn't lubricate anything anymore, the chain freezes, the brakes barely stop you because the compounds have no grip at that temperature. I'm sure once the car manages to get up to operating temperature things are mostly fine, but that's a lot of thermal expansion and contraction.

All of them are deeply disconnected from real life. Poilievre isn't just a career politician, he's literally held no other jobs at all. He loves talking about how the government spends too much money on whatever, and HE'S what we've been spending money on. He hates unions and loves oil, and that's it.

I didn't vote for either of these dipstick parties. They're responsible for literally 100% of the Federal governments going back to Confederation; there is nobody else to blame. There have been precious few federal governments that have made things better rather than coincidentally been in power while we MADE things better ourselves.

For 20 years, plus or minus, personal computers reversed that idea.

Was there much overlap between the 6502 version and the 8088 version, or did it need to be completely rewritten?

I could see them having a higher level design, which could in theory actually be C code, which just needed to be rendered, er, compiled down to the specific instruction sets. I'm assuming all this assembly was written as assembly, but there could still be a higher-level design, rendered as flowcharts or whatever that was translated for each architecture.

It's a fascinating part of computer history. I miss those days, even though I never actually had my own computer until after I graduated from college.

Okay, I see where you're coming from, and I know people like you that are very pedantic about language and I'm not going to be critical of it in particular. That's how you interpret things, okay. :)

(Also, don't think that I'm ragging on your choice of vehicle. Every time I see one that's obviously fairly old, I know it's because it's a practical choice. I don't actually have any problems with trucks over any other sort of car, I just detest that knowing what we know now, it's popular to buy huge trucks that aren't used for work, are terrible for roads and the environment, and are objectively more dangerous to people outside of the vehicle than the trucks of 20-30 years ago.)

But absolutist speech and hyperbole are well established ways to communicate; I would wager that MOST people making these statements do not mean them literally, but use it as a form of emphasis that broadly speaking, most listeners understand to be metaphorical.

Obviously, I have the same sort of tendency in my descriptions, but my argument was maybe unclear so I'll make it more plain here: in general, I do not think people are coming to their senses. I think they're being forced by economic conditions to make certain choices, and given any other option, they would still be out there buying expensive cars. Indeed, I think people are still making bad decisions and buying vehicles that they can't afford. Canadians specifically owe about $1.80 for every $1 they earn. I don't think this debt is from nowhere. The average non-mortgage debt in this country is in the tens of thousands of dollars.

I guess the problem I have with your framing is that people have made a change and now realize that being debt free and driving a paid off car is better, rather than being temporarily inconvenienced and driving the paid off car because they've been backed into a corner. I think very few people have learned their lesson, and the next time they get a chance, they will go back to making bad decisions. Yes, there will be some that have seen the light, but I think that as a proportion of the population, that segment is getting smaller, not larger.

I think there are signs of this anywhere, not least of which when you hear investors say, "this time it's different!" Or the housing boom and bust cycles. When I was a kid growing up in Alberta in the 80s, there was a bumper sticker that said, "Lord, please give us one more oil boom and we promise not to piss it away this time". Well, we had another oil boom, and we pissed it away again. And again.

And then we have people failing to understand that the reason why we don't see as many kids dying from measles is because so many of us were vaccinated, but they think it's a reason why we can GET RID of vaccine mandates.

My cynicism stems from substantial numbers of people voting against their own interests, making repeated bad financial decisions, and saying out loud how little they've learned about the world and recent history. Maybe you're more of an optimist than me. :)

No it's not "obvious." My wife and I own 3 properties. One is commercial, the other two are residential. That might paint us as extremely wealthy but neither property is huge. We're fairly middle class. We use both residential properties interchangeably because they're not huge houses and we like our space. We could sell both and move into a single dwelling but we like things the way they are. Especially now that our daughters are adults in their twenties, who still live at home for the time being, but have their friends & significant others stay over quite a bit. I'm too much of an autistic introvert to live with that many other people in the same house 24/7 even if the house were a mansion.

The only reason I pay for the highest tier Netflix account is because of the number of devices allowed. Basically for my wife and daughters. I almost never watch it myself. Every time I open it up I feel like I spend more time scrolling to try and find something to watch than actually watching content. So if Netflix comes after us for "account sharing" I'm cancelling our subscription immediately without thinking twice about it. We're a single family, we just occupy multiple locations most of the time.

And our case is a bit more complicated than people who are talking about paying for a family account that includes kids who are away at school or camp or what-have-you. Or families who travel a lot. My wife and I are magicians (our commercial property is a small theatre and magic shop). This gets me thinking about families that travel for work. Army families or entertainers. Imagine being a Cirque Du Soleil performer - many of whom have kids ... they live on the road most days of the year.

The point is that there is no one-sized-fits-all "family" and it's more common for a nuclear family to occupy multiple locations than many would think.

It's just another catalyst for people who are mentally ill (and probably not very smart) to do harm. It's inevitable with any new kind of technology.

Yeah, and I have no car at all. But that's not really the point.

Driving a paid off car (or not having to make car payments by not owning a car) is definitely the smart choice. I was laid off in June, and I'm still thankful that I don't have car payments to make on top of a mortgage.

But we're actually the weirdos. The AC is right: broadly speaking, when times are good, people loooooove wasting their money on cars they don't need. Look at every lifted F-150 on the roads. Mostly useless as an actual truck, bad on gas, only used to commute a few km to the office and pick up groceries. Nothing ever goes in the bed (it's too high to reach anyway), it never tows anything, and it doesn't fit in a driveway, let alone a parking spot. Then there are the luxury cars, the top-end EVs, etc.

I dunno if you've looked at the news lately, but the idea that anyone is 'coming to their senses' is just not at all true. They're sitting down and making thorough, considered plans to make bad decisions. Everyone is leveraged to the tits and has no savings. Just accept that you've made better decisions than most.

If you go now little troll ...

Did you actually have anything to add to the conversation or was your post just agreeing I am right while implying I claimed better performance when I definitely didn't do that?