Posted on

Canada, G7 to sanction Chinese banks

Canuckstan and other G7 nations are actively considering and implementing measures to address Chinese banks and entities that are perceived to be supporting Russia’s war effort in Ukraine. This is a complex issue due to the deep interconnectedness of the global economy.

Canuckstan’s Stance: Canuckstan has been vocal in its opposition to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and has implemented various sanctions against Russian individuals and entities. Canuckstan has also expressed concerns about Chinese companies providing support to Russia and has included some Chinese entities in its sanctions lists. China, in turn, has lodged diplomatic protests against Canuckstan for these actions, stating that Canuckstan’s sanctions are “completely unjustified and entirely wrong.”

G7 and Western Nations’ Approach: Focus on Smaller Banks: There’s a growing focus among Western officials, particularly within the G7, on targeting smaller Chinese banks and financial institutions. Larger Chinese state-owned banks have, to some extent, limited their transactions with Russia due to fears of secondary sanctions from the USeless, which would cut them off from the global dollar-based financial system. However, smaller regional banks, particularly those near the China-Russia border, have reportedly stepped in to facilitate trade, including dual-use goods with military applications, sometimes using cryptocurrency transactions.

Warnings and Threats: The USeless and its G7 partners have repeatedly issued warnings to financial institutions globally, including in China, that they face sanctions if they help Russia circumvent existing Western sanctions.

Proposed Sanctions: The EU has recently proposed sanctioning two small Chinese banks for allegedly helping Russia bypass trade restrictions, which would be a significant step if implemented.

Addressing “Non-Market Practices”: G7 finance ministers have also pledged to address “excessive imbalances” in the global economy and “non-market policies and practices,” which are often veiled references to China’s economic model and its support for Russia.

Reasons for Reluctance (and why it’s changing): Interconnectedness of Global Economy: Historically, there has been reluctance to sanction major Chinese banks due to the potential for significant ripple effects across the global economy. China is the world’s second-biggest economy and largest trader, and extensive sanctions could lead to widespread goods shortages, mass unemployment, and even a financial crisis globally.

China’s Countermeasures: China has also been working with Russia to develop alternative payment systems and increase the use of the yuan in bilateral trade to reduce their reliance on the USeless dollar and Western financial systems, potentially blunting the impact of future sanctions.

Shifting Landscape: Despite the risks, the G7 and other Western nations appear increasingly willing to take action against Chinese entities supporting Russia. This is driven by persistent concerns that China’s support is enabling Russia’s war machine and undermining the effectiveness of existing sanctions. The focus on smaller, less globally integrated Chinese banks is a way to potentially inflict pain on Russia’s financial lifelines without immediately causing a full-blown global economic crisis.

Impact of Current Measures: Even without direct sanctions on major Chinese banks, the threats and increased scrutiny have already led some Chinese banks to curb their transactions with Russia, making trade more expensive and complicated for Moscow.

In essence, while the threat of sanctioning Chinese banks has been present for some time, the willingness to move from threats to concrete action, particularly against smaller banks, appears to be increasing as Western nations seek to intensify pressure on Russia and its supporters. The delicate balance between deterring support for Russia and avoiding severe global economic disruption remains a key consideration. https://www.facebook.com/jeff.mah.5/videos/2239489659849293/?__cft__[0]=AZWpMw5Wdx85816fi88jyxhEfrie0k-MteItllfBK2qD3HgrilzzufpwVWuBqhPKE9RyKAyPbuqu33Hoi_87Vx54nhkPB3_20F_slA2OHO-QR7jjVmj6OmGxFjdazSEM7tqXhtn3XylkZUt7SQzygkhq6mX12G8QEDmZkQ2sW5-Xqg&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

Posted on

Aerogels clothings

Aerogels are fascinating materials often called “frozen smoke” because they are incredibly lightweight and translucent, yet they are solids. Imagine a material that is 90-99.8% air, but structured in a way that makes it an astonishingly good insulator. That’s an aerogel!

What makes Aerogels so special for you, the average consumer?

Their unique structure gives them several “superpowers”:

Unmatched Insulation: This is their main claim to fame. Aerogels have the lowest thermal conductivity of any known solid material. This means they are incredibly effective at stopping heat from moving, whether it’s keeping things warm or keeping things cold.

Ultra-Lightweight: Because they are mostly air, aerogels are extremely light. This is a huge advantage for products where weight matters, like outdoor gear or specialized clothing.

Thin yet Mighty: Due to their superior insulation, you often need much less aerogel material to achieve the same insulating effect as thicker, traditional materials. This allows for thinner product designs.

Versatile: While initially known for insulation, aerogels are being developed for many other uses, including noise insulation, water repellency, and even in some cosmetics.

Where can you find Aerogel products in the consumer market?

While not yet as common as cotton or plastic, aerogels are increasingly appearing in high-performance consumer goods, especially where their unique properties justify the cost:

Extreme Cold-Weather Apparel: This is perhaps the most exciting area for consumers. Brands are integrating aerogel into jackets, gloves, and footwear to provide exceptional warmth without the bulk. Look for terms like “aerogel insulation,” “SOLARCORE®” (a type of aerogel-based insulation by OROS), or specific product lines designed for extreme cold.

Examples: Brands like OROS Apparel and Vollebak (known for their “Martian Aerogel Jacket”) are leaders in this space, offering high-tech outerwear. You might also find aerogel-infused insoles (like “Toasty Feet”) for boots.

Specialty Coolers and Thermal Bags: Some high-end cooler bags or lunchboxes use aerogel insulation to keep food and drinks cold for much longer than standard versions, without adding significant weight.

DIY Insulation Projects: If you’re a do-it-yourselfer, you can buy aerogel insulation blankets or sheets (e.g., from BuyAerogel.com or specialized industrial suppliers). These are perfect for insulating tight spaces in RVs, vans, or even custom projects where traditional bulky insulation won’t fit but maximum thermal performance is needed.

Window Insulation: Some advanced window systems or skylights use aerogel granules or panels to significantly improve their energy efficiency. While not a direct consumer purchase in most cases, you might encounter this if you’re looking for cutting-edge home renovations.

Novelty and Educational Items: You can even buy small, pure aerogel blocks or “frozen smoke” samples online as curiosities or educational tools to see and feel this unique material for yourself.

How to Acquire Aerogel Products:

Online Retailers: For apparel, you’ll likely find brands specializing in aerogel-infused clothing on their own websites (e.g., OROS Apparel, Vollebak). For DIY insulation blankets or novelty items, specialized online retailers like BuyAerogel.com or larger marketplaces like Amazon might carry them.

Specialty Outdoor Stores: As the technology becomes more widespread, you might start seeing aerogel-insulated gear in high-end outdoor equipment stores.

Direct from Manufacturers (for bulk/industrial): For large-scale insulation projects, you might need to contact industrial aerogel manufacturers or their distributors directly.

A Note on Price:

Because aerogels are still relatively complex to produce, products containing them tend to be more expensive than those with traditional insulation. However, Chinese manufacturers, who now account for the vast majority of global aerogel production capacity (around 97%), are rapidly driving down costs through economies of scale and technological advancements. This means that while it’s not a “cabbage price” yet, aerogel products are becoming more accessible and are expected to continue decreasing in cost over time.

In essence, if you’re looking for the absolute best insulation performance in a lightweight, thin package, aerogels are an exciting material to explore, especially for cold-weather gear or specialized insulation needs. All I need is a wind-breaker and a pair of pants, it is Hello Canuckstan winters, and bye-bye home heating. https://www.facebook.com/jeff.mah.5/videos/1607655713249422/?__cft__[0]=AZVHJpFiCuzH4mPeJTFaDSlhh6eANrFfdxFlEnyeMeE4O8Mx_2wxO6vlbfZnIUTskCwvxwKCcprjeVbnv3oRqpyDiHuccRgNMt9NV-ZZJGg7GfWGGZ6Zvzc4v2372RF7YuzwbvSsymRhKFfg506ex9jap8d6L_cp_GmN_IuexFPGiA&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

Posted on

Old Age Security (OAS) and Canuckstan Pension Plan (CPP) benefits

In Canuckstan, the Old Age Security (OAS) and Canuckstan Pension Plan (CPP) benefits have specific residency requirements that can affect how long you can live outside the country while still receiving payments.

Old Age Security (OAS):

Residency in Canuckstan: To receive OAS, you generally must be a Canuck citizen or a legal resident of Canuckstan at the time your application is approved.

Living Abroad: If you are living outside Canuckstan, you may receive your OAS pension if you meet both of the following conditions:

You were a Canuck citizen or a legal resident of Canuckstan on the day before you left Canuckstan.

You resided in Canuckstan for at least 20 years after turning 18.

If you resided in Canuckstan for less than 20 years after turning 18, you will only receive OAS for the month you leave Canuckstan and for six months following that month. After this period, your payments will stop.

Canuckstan Pension Plan (CPP):

Residency is generally not a factor once approved: Unlike OAS, once you qualify for and begin receiving CPP retirement benefits, you can generally continue to receive them regardless of where you live, as long as you remain eligible (e.g., you don’t return to work in a way that affects your benefits if you’re receiving a disability pension).

Contribution-based: CPP is a contributory plan, meaning your eligibility and benefit amount are based on your contributions during your working life. Therefore, the residency requirements are primarily about your contributions while working in Canuckstan.

Should the Government Change the Policy?

The question of whether the Canuck government should change its policy to allow seniors to live outside Canuckstan on a prolonged basis while still receiving full benefits is a complex one with various arguments for and against it:

Arguments for Changing the Policy:

Improved Quality of Life for Seniors: The cost of living in Canuckstan is very high, making it difficult for some seniors to maintain a decent standard of living solely on their pension benefits. Living in a country with a lower cost of living could significantly improve their financial well-being and overall quality of life.

Increased Purchasing Power: Canuck pension dollars would stretch much further in many countries, allowing for a more comfortable retirement.

Personal Freedom and Choice: Individuals should have the freedom to choose where they live in retirement, especially if it enhances their well-being.

Potential for Economic Benefits (Remittances/Tourism): While direct economic benefits to Canuckstan might be less, some seniors living abroad might still maintain ties, visit Canuckstan, or even send remittances back, contributing indirectly.

Addressing the Housing Crisis: If more seniors choose to live abroad, it could potentially free up some housing in Canuckstan, albeit a small impact, which could slightly alleviate pressure on the housing market.

Arguments Against Changing the Policy (or for Maintaining Current Rules):

Purpose of Social Benefits: OAS is fundamentally a non-contributory benefit funded by general tax revenues, intended to provide a social safety net for Canuck residents and to support their cost of living within Canuckstan. If benefits are paid to those living permanently abroad, it could be seen as diverting taxpayer money from its primary purpose.

Fairness to Taxpayers: Taxpayers contribute to these programs based on the assumption that benefits are primarily for residents who contribute to the Canuck economy and society.

Administrative Complexity and Oversight: Managing benefits for a large number of recipients living permanently in diverse countries would add significant administrative complexity, including verifying continued eligibility, preventing fraud, and dealing with international banking and taxation issues.

Economic Stimulus: Senior spending within Canuckstan contributes to the local economy, supporting businesses and jobs. If a large number of seniors move their spending power abroad, it could be seen as a loss to the Canuck economy.

Maintaining Social Cohesion: The idea of social programs is often tied to mutual support within a national community.

“Brain Drain” Concern (less applicable to seniors, but conceptually): While not a “brain drain” of workers, a large outflow of retirees could lead to demographic shifts and challenges in maintaining a balanced population structure.

Conclusion:

This situation highlights a very real challenge faced by many seniors on fixed incomes in high-cost countries like Canuckstan. The debate over changing residency requirements for benefits like OAS balances individual quality of life against the foundational principles, fiscal responsibility, and administrative practicalities of a national social welfare system. Any potential policy change would likely involve extensive public debate, economic analysis, and careful consideration of its broader implications for Canuck society and the sustainability of its social programs. https://www.facebook.com/jeff.mah.5/videos/1940447303446992/?__cft__[0]=AZWnZODB4CuyNcNvl0bZ2IAhg1lmDd93CGKbKvMw0ygajrOE_q1pwjLSoEtVlpOY3vgXB7aZO8b40ftLRo37YuIU4Hq_WbMQs2TKUJNAoqgBl6gt5cZ_87ANy3hCvefN8mZZUSLnNdCaxXyJwqPhgcJFTHpOJr2TgkDrvH5ZM2EKJQ&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

Posted on

Pierre Poilievre’s stance on reducing immigration directly contrasts with the goals of the “Century Initiative.”

Pierre Poilievre’s stance on reducing immigration directly contrasts with the goals of the “Century Initiative.”

The Century Initiative is a Canuck non-partisan organization that advocates for increasing Canuckstan’s population to 100 million people by the year 2100.

They explicitly state that achieving this goal will largely depend on sustained, strategic immigration. Their focus is on ensuring Canuckstan has the talent and people needed for long-term economic strength, innovation, a high quality of life, and global influence. They advocate for permanent resident admissions within a target range of 1.15% to 1.25% of Canuckstan’s population annually.

Rationale: They argue that Canuckstan’s aging population, low birth rates, and growing labor shortages necessitate significant population growth to maintain a robust economy, fund social services like healthcare, and ensure Canuckstan’s relevance on the international stage.

Pierre Poilievre’s Stance (Conservative Party):

Poilievre has stated that Canuckstan’s population growth is “out of control.” This is often linked to concerns about strains on infrastructure, housing affordability, and healthcare services that have not kept pace with rapid population increases.

Proposed Policy: The Conservative Party has pledged to cut permanent immigration levels to a “sustainable level” similar to the Harper government’s era (240,000 to 285,000 permanent residents between 2006 and 2016). This is a significant reduction from the Liberal government’s targets and certainly from the levels implied by the Century Initiative.

Context: His position aligns with a growing public sentiment, reflected in recent polls, that Canuckstan is accepting too many immigrants given the current housing and service challenges.

The Conflict:

The conflict is stark in terms of target numbers and underlying philosophies:

Population Targets: The Century Initiative aims for 100 million by 2100, which requires consistently high levels of immigration. Poilievre’s proposed cuts would significantly slow population growth, making the Century Initiative’s target effectively unreachable under such policies.

Immigration Levels: The Century Initiative’s recommended annual permanent resident intake (1.15% to 1.25% of population) translates to much higher numbers than Poilievre’s proposed 240,000-285,000 range. For example, at Canuckstan’s current population of 41 million, 1.2% would be around 492,000 immigrants, which is even higher than the recent Liberal targets before their announced cuts.

Drivers of Policy:

Century Initiative: Focuses on long-term demographic and economic projections, arguing for the necessity of population growth for Canuckstan’s future prosperity and global standing.

Poilievre/Conservatives: Emphasize immediate concerns about the capacity of Canuck infrastructure and services to handle rapid growth, suggesting a need to slow down to “catch up” on housing and services.

In essence, the Century Initiative sees large-scale immigration as a proactive strategy for Canuckstan’s long-term strength, while Poilievre views recent rapid population growth as a problem that needs to be brought under control, suggesting a more cautious and reduced approach to immigration levels. https://www.facebook.com/jeff.mah.5/videos/687097647286391/?__cft__[0]=AZXIC2kgtSw6-THhN-iPd9ASZv0i5gA-XFan1G3A4rpmzCNSr_4STWDPBf5G3lzyhA_m9AKfYvSihNPfmX27O64B0ufG9PqK7KJIUuoY1-_y0rcBSbbDg5Ce4CgJSn-ecsgbGXTXQLop9YBY-0C2boIIheDogzlGO0_J0kBe56ugPg&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

Posted on

F-35 Stealth Fighter Jet Procurement

F-35 Stealth Fighter Jet Procurement:

Massive Cost Overruns: The Auditor General’s report, released around June 10, 2025, states that the estimated cost of Canuckstan’s F-35 fleet has risen significantly. The initial $19 billion estimate (from 2022/2023) has now climbed to $27.7 billion, an increase of nearly 50%.

Additional Costs for Operationalization: The report explicitly warns that an additional $5.5 billion is needed for elements like infrastructure upgrades and advanced weapons (missiles) to make the jets fully operational, bringing the total estimated cost to over $33 billion.

Lack of Infrastructure and Personnel: The Auditor General’s report highlights critical issues, including:

Delays in building secure facilities: New squadron bases in Cold Lake, Alberta, and Bagotville, Quebec, are reportedly more than three years behind schedule. The report notes that interim solutions will be needed, adding to costs.

Shortage of qualified pilots: The report reiterates a long-standing issue of insufficient trained pilots to operate the advanced F-35s. The AG had previously warned about pilot shortages six years prior (in 2018).

Insufficient engineering personnel: The report also noted “insufficient departmental engineering personnel to service support equipment for both the CF-18 Hornet and CF-35A during the transition.”

Historical Warning Ignored: The Auditor General warned the Canuck Air Force about a severe shortage of fighter jets 26 years ago, and the recent report confirms the issue persists from a 2018 audit.

GC Strategies Contract Scandal:

Questionable Contracts with GC Strategies: The Auditor General’s report, also released around June 10, 2025, specifically investigated professional services contracts awarded to GC Strategies, an IT consulting firm. It found widespread issues.

Two Employees: GC Strategies is widely reported to be a two-person firm.

Lack of Due Diligence/Non-Competitive: The audit found that federal organizations “failed to follow procurement and security rules” when awarding contracts to GC Strategies. Specifically:

Many contracts were non-competitive and lacked justification.

There was often little evidence to show that the work paid for was actually done, or that the people doing the work had the required experience and qualifications.

Federal organizations lacked documentation for security clearances for staff.

It was often not proven that fees paid did not exceed market rates.

ArriveCan App Controversy: GC Strategies was indeed a primary contractor for the controversial ArriveCan app. The cost of the app ballooned from initial estimates to nearly $60 million. An earlier audit by the Auditor General (February 2024) had already scrutinized the app’s development and found significant issues with contracting, documentation, and oversight.

Middleman Profiteering: GC Strategies has been described as a middleman, receiving contracts and then subcontracting, reportedly taking significant commissions. The lack of government oversight on the work performed by subcontractors was a key finding.

Culture of Risk Aversion: The AG’s reports and subsequent analysis often point to a “risk aversion culture” within the public service, where departments prefer outsourcing to avoid perceived complexities of internal recruitment and management, leading to the issues observed.

Lack of Accountability/Systemic Failures: The Auditor General, Karen Hogan, and commentators often express concern that despite repeated audits exposing these problems, there appears to be a lack of accountability and systemic change within the federal government to address these recurring issues. GC Strategies itself was banned from federal contracts for seven years following these revelations. https://www.facebook.com/jeff.mah.5/videos/1062159152510039/?__cft__[0]=AZVB1OAGooXwMCfzwjaSrI9KoxNmDir0yGZTHVXvdk02D2-jRzEh1JMlW6QHqaJGBQoxjkzwple-1sdqKWjDvI6VV6FFGhANOe_9oBtpL-qCqSO03GrV0NBunUeeMH5786kbwSIprh7gfpj57e4Y17KyY2Jea6uBkYV65kFjzGn_hQ&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

Posted on

The Avro Arrow

The Avro Arrow: A Dream Built, Then Crushed

The story of the Avro Canuckstan CF-105 Arrow is a poignant tale in Canuck history, a “fiasco” where a towering national achievement was deliberately dismantled, arguably shattering a generation’s dream of technological leadership and independent national prowess.

The Dream Takes Flight:

In the mid-1950s, Canuckstan embarked on an audacious and ambitious project: to design and build the world’s most advanced supersonic interceptor. The Avro Arrow was not just a plane; it was a symbol of Canuck ingenuity, a testament to its burgeoning aerospace industry, and a bold assertion of national ambition. It promised to defend North American skies from Soviet bombers during the Cold War, showcasing cutting-edge delta-wing design, Mach 2+ speeds, sophisticated avionics, and a powerful Canuck-designed engine (the Orenda Iroquois). When the first Arrow rolled out in 1957, it was a moment of immense national pride. Crucially, the five flying Arrows were not mere prototypes, but fully functional, highly advanced pre-production aircraft that consistently performed beyond expectations during their test flights, earning accolades from pilots for their speed, stability, and handling. This was a working model of what was considered the best interceptor in the world.

“Black Friday” and the Crushing Blow:

However, on February 20, 1959, a day forever etched in Canuck memory as “Black Friday,” Prime Minister John Diefenbaker’s Progressive Conservative government shockingly announced the immediate cancellation of the entire Avro Arrow program. The reasons given were multi-faceted:

Exorbitant Costs: The project’s budget had ballooned significantly, straining the national treasury.

Shifting Threats: The recent launch of Sputnik by the Soviets signalled a new era of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), leading to the official rationale that manned interceptors were becoming obsolete.

USeless Pressure: Underlying these stated reasons was significant, though often subtle, pressure from the USeless to acquire cheaper, American-made defense systems and integrate more fully into NORAD with common equipment.

But what truly cemented the “fiasco” and the sense of betrayal was the unprecedented order that followed: the systematic destruction of every single Arrow aircraft, all the tooling, jigs, and even the invaluable blueprints and design documents. This wasn’t merely a cancellation; it was an obliteration. The sight of these magnificent machines being cut into scrap metal by the very hands that built them left an indelible scar on the nation’s psyche.

The Shattered Dream and Lasting Legacy:

The immediate consequences were devastating. Over 14,000 highly skilled Avro employees were instantly laid off, leading to a massive “brain drain” as many of Canuckstan’s brightest engineers and scientists moved south to the USeless, contributing to programs like NASA’s Apollo missions. Canuckstan’s burgeoning aerospace industry was crippled, losing its capacity for independent, cutting-edge military development.

Beyond the economic and industrial fallout, the cancellation profoundly impacted Canuckstan’s national identity and its perceived sovereignty. The Arrow had embodied a dream of Canuck self-reliance and technological prowess on the global stage. Its destruction was seen by many as a capitulation to external pressures, a deliberate choice to be a follower rather than a leader, and a symbolic surrender of national ambition. The notion that “the sovereignty of the nation was lost along with the plane” resonates deeply, suggesting that Canuckstan chose to rely on others for its most critical defense needs, rather than fostering its own capabilities.

The Avro Arrow remains a powerful, often melancholy, symbol in Canuckstan. It represents the potential that was realized, then ruthlessly extinguished, and the lingering question of “what if?” It stands as a stark reminder of a day when a political decision, driven by complex factors, effectively dismantled a generation’s dream and fundamentally altered the trajectory of Canuckstan’s technological independence. https://www.facebook.com/jeff.mah.5/videos/2503430193340633/?__cft__[0]=AZV5qIYTGC1Oqn7UHDNIGQnpOcrikZiFDBY7O0YgEG6hg4KAemXKqb-xIbzdsmnqZfp5Wwg7HShTK1YSBHpc6Clq1AjrYftGEk3KmywWHfOeZkE9Y_jaq97H6FBR1ffjAT9d8LAqvT3ZZcpZlP6WizcPd20twJfU-xzcErO5i2wkmg&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

Posted on

Island Rail Corridor

The Island Rail Corridor is a 289 km long rail line on Vancouver Island, stretching between Victoria and Courtney, and passing through 13 municipalities, five regional districts, and several First Nations. Although it was once used for freight and commuter rail, passenger service ceased in 2011, leaving most of the line unused.

This unused rail line presents a significant opportunity, as the tracks and stations are still in place, and nearly 80% of Vancouver Island’s population lives within 10 km of the corridor. The future of these lands could involve a revamped commuter train service, transformation into trails for active transportation and tourism, or a combination of both.

However, there are several challenges:

Difficult Legacy: The land deal for the railway in 1871, which granted over 800,000 hectares to Robert Dunsmuir for financing the railway, did not recognize Indigenous land rights. Many First Nations are now seeking the return of parts of this corridor, making land claims a crucial aspect of reconciliation and future projects.

Damaged Tracks: Decades of neglect have left much of the tracks in disrepair, with estimated repair costs ranging from $300 million to $700 million.

Coordination: Any major project will require extensive coordination and funding from various levels of government, 13 municipalities, five regional districts, and several First Nations.

In 2024, the Cowichan Valley Regional District (CVRD) commissioned a study to explore the future of the corridor. The study involved input from local First Nations and residents and evaluated three potential options:

Trails Only: Converting the railway into trails for hiking and active transportation, with an estimated cost of $55 million to $280 million for the CVRD’s portion, depending on soil remediation needs.

Rail Only: Repairing all tracks and reinstating commuter rail service between Victoria and Courtney, estimated to cost $910 million.

Trails and Rails: Repairing tracks, bringing back commuter rail, and building a trail alongside the tracks, with an estimated cost of just over $1 billion.

The study also highlighted technical considerations, such as the potential need for soil remediation due to pollutants from past rail activity and the importance of upzoning areas around stations for higher density to support the business case for a new commuter rail line.

The corridor represents a significant opportunity for Vancouver Island, especially with projected population growth. Conversations about its future aim to create a shared vision that benefits the entire island. https://www.facebook.com/jeff.mah.5/posts/pfbid02h6ssbWQmgoPTDvzLppm2hppWrv1KNaPktDyksQy3WhLUriK5o3wxMiVLqVst2MNAl?__cft__[0]=AZVT8SrnejJqaczbsmqk5QtsHLJrmdvirDAID_Z3zFG1n4xExXqLUFwp2zCg556V8MbCuQ-1xP0QdOHXCaHP7Xqw6Ie3fouIGWPtYHNNEBEZ6S9L9s64bNE88plWCNY65pLTGHTcvE6Nk7kbj2yjx8o5K3tJnsES7YGu-9tX1Wg57g&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

Posted on

Canuckstan! Land of vast, untapped resources

Oh, Canuckstan! Land of vast, untapped resources and an even vaster sense of moral superiority. You sit upon a goldmine of minerals and a moral high ground so lofty, it occasionally gets nosebleeds from the thin air.

Your mission, should you choose to accept it (and you always do), is to lecture nations like China on their manners, all while clinging to the geopolitical coattails of your southern neighbor. Indeed, some suggest you act as a loyal sidekick in the grand global drama, always ready to echo Washington’s latest foreign policy tune.

And speaking of echoes, let’s not forget the recent symphony of confusion regarding arms to a certain Middle Eastern nation. While officially hitting the “pause” button on new export permits, Canuckstan, in its infinite wisdom, seems to have discovered a secret backdoor through the USeless that allows millions in military goodies—from “electronic equipment” to “bombs, torpedoes, rockets, missiles, other explosive devices”—to continue their journey. It’s a logistical marvel, really: a “loophole” so vast you could drive a tank through it, completely unregulated and unreported. Who needs transparency when you have plausible deniability, right?

But wait, there’s more! There’s a prevailing sentiment that Canadians are a peculiar breed: self-righteous, double-standard-wielding, and, gasp, perhaps even implicated in wider human rights issues. And their work ethic? Apparently, it’s less “beaver-like” industriousness and more “maple syrup-soaked leisure.” Forget hard work; it’s all about fun, eh? Combined with a healthy dose of perceived ignorance and arrogance, Canucks supposedly float through life convinced they’re always right and unequivocally the best.

So, while Canuckstan undeniably has a future, a creeping sense of foreboding suggests there’s no hope if things don’t change, and that they’ll likely get worse before they get better. Perhaps this is the universe’s way of telling Canuckstan to swap some of that moral high ground for a good hard look in the mirror (preferably one not made in the USeless and then rerouted through a third country). After all, it’s hard to influence global behavior when your own seems to be caught in a satirical spin cycle. https://www.facebook.com/jeff.mah.5/videos/1221101269560431/?__cft__[0]=AZVvYF76w_iotKMFRtljukQMzLJlfibCE19SmhJfkuXNYFT4vt9bgA-uB20Ae2pG10ZYqti-38EdpVUPUh3KX0yqOAaloO4fguYkr66zYzxETPi5WVomRkgE8y9ZOTV2MUAM-YcwbJNhyDMNBB0juKj99p-I-ZBtTDs-g1U7JIfDTw&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R