all 43 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 35 points 1 year ago (1 child)

“The certification requirements of other jurisdictions may not be sufficient to meet the safety needs of Canadian road users due to Canada’s distinct driving environment,” wrote Sau Sau Liu, senior communications advisor for Transport Canada, adding that Canadian crash safety standards are tailored to the larger vehicles typically found on our roads.

We already have Vespas and Smart Fortwos. I think we'll be okay.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I would love to have a small electric vehicle, as most of my driving is done inside a small city. The choices are limited and too expensive for my budget.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I would like an armoured bicycle

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

    Why should I be restricted from driving a reasonable vehicle just because everyone else wants to drive an assault vehicle?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    not to mention that you're punished for it if you don't buy a high riding vehicle, because every other vehicle nowadays has weaponized headlights for lowbeams

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    There should be an immediate ban on assault style vehicles and all vehicles sold with black metal panels instead of wood. Fuel tanks should be restricted to 300km and transmissions should be manual not automatic!

    Shit, actually I would kill for a tiny, wood paneled, stick shift car...

    wow, guess I have to add an /s to this

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    I get the other points but why wood panels? Seems like an aesthetic choice really. Don't force PT cruisers on everyone, that's too cruel.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    There was at least one firearm banned in Canada, the all black metal and plastic variant, who's wood stock counterpart was permitted. It was a jab at the smooth brain, black guns are scary, policy makers we have.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (15 children)

    The desire to carry water for American companies or European companies by excluding China is strange. Aus doesn't play that game. Trying to be protectionist on dead end ICE manufacturing capability will only serve to put them deeper and deeper into the grave that they want to share with the US.

    I think that anybody who's trying to protect ICE manufacturing should take a hard look at what happened in China. They literally killed their ICE manufacturing with their new energy vehicle push. Absolutely gutted it. And they're reaping the rewards of doing so.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (14 children)

    Chinese vehicles are built with subsidies and sometimes even slave labor to flood the market at artificially low prices.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    When the west does it it's called freedom but when China foes it it'd called artificial tyranny.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    So is it okay because the West does it too or wdym

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    Very simple concept. If 2+2=4 in China and in the West, then if a thing done in the West is "good" then the same thing being done in China must also be "good". The action, not the actor, should determine if a thing is "good" or "bad". Almost all news sources define "good" and "bad" subjectively (i.e. based on the actor) not objectively (i.e. based on the action and the result).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    So are both of those things good or bad in your opinion?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Thankyou kind human. Edit: I will go to hell for this but China having a car company called Chery, must cause confusion if the Ch is a Shuh sound like Chevy. Maybe the naming was on purpose to seem close to the American brand?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The tech and production capacity is good, there just needs to be stricter oversight because at this moment there are no other producers of low cost EVs and I don't really care if they're subsidized when the other players on the market are 15 years behind.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    either the government is subsidizing them below their value to squash competition or they're making money off of them but it cannot be both.

    with that said fuck China for persistently siding with Russian authoritarianism.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    oh noes please save me from the being offered the chance to buy modern, well built, and affordable EVs 😢

    One more oversized gas guzzler for maximum price please. And shaft me on the services too.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    A contributing factor may be the number of American car companies with factories here—I mean, there are a few European/Japanese/whatever auto brands that do some manufacturing here too, but not as much. It's an industry that seems to have a political voice that's larger than its contribution to the national economy (or at least, that's the impression one gets from the news here in Ontario). Lobbying to tweak the rules to make certification easier for American vehicles than others seems on-brand.

    If that is part of the reason, Trump may have torpedoed it, but it'll take years for the mess to untangle itself even so.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's not just you, it's part of what feeds into the western province grievance thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    What's to be aggrieved about? I've never once heard the auto industry being a factor in western alienation. And I've written papers on the subject.

    The auto industry is Canada's largest manufacturing industry, contributing more than $15B to GDP and 500,000 good paying jobs. There's good reason to protect it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Yes there is, especially given how vulnerable it will be to Trump messing with the border, and how it could theoretically carry on with a bit of help. That being said, relative to the amount it generates for the economy it does seem to have extra political pull, like OP said. Maybe because people prize manufacturing over services or natural resources.

    I’ve never once heard the auto industry being a factor in western alienation. And I’ve written papers on the subject.

    Really? Well, let me be a primary source for you: More than once, the auto industry has come up IRL in rural Alberta, and someone's said "that's an Ontario industry so the federal government cares about it".

    That's not necessarily part of the historical origin of the alienation - if you've written papers you'll actually know more about that than me - but it's definitely folded in now. I remember one conversation where I actually won someone over to EVs a bit with the fact there's lithium in old oil wells.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I am guessing Canadians love big trucks, jacked up?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    They have to meet the joint North American standards regardless. Even the Honda Fit is no longer sold in North America because they figured it wasn't worth putting through the paces. I thought that would be the subcompact car that survived, but no.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Protectionism so we grow weak and fail 🥰🥰🥰

    Don't learn from history, Detroit was a one-off right?

  • source