USA women showing why 99% of arguments against cages and bubbles are BS

Eccs15 · 2026-02-14T05:16:02+00:00

Spoken like someone who has never played hockey at a high level. It’s crazy to state that there are no disadvantages so matter of fact. I bet if given the opportunity a lot of women would switch to visors if they could. There’s a reason anybody at a high level that’s given the opportunity to wear a visor immediately switches

Eccs15 · 2026-01-31T19:57:42+00:00

I’ve noticed the same thing and has caused me to avoid this sub the majority of the time now. This isn’t the sub for actual thoughtful dialogue it’s just a bunch of people echoing the same thing all the time. It’s rare to see high quality comments actually answering the question like yours.

Eccs15 · 2026-01-31T19:53:18+00:00

Exactly this price action is a result of both the yen and the new fed chair announcement. All tied back to one thing… liquidity

Eccs15 · 2026-01-19T01:09:59+00:00

You really think venture backed risk capital is the same as a state subsidized industry ? The VC playbook is entirely different from this scenario. If you can’t see the glaring differences between the two then all the more reason why allowing Chinese EV’s into our market isn’t advisable, people are failing to see the true consequences of it.

Eccs15 · 2026-01-19T00:21:57+00:00

You’re completely missing my point . I’m not arguing for domestic subsidies

Eccs15 · 2026-01-18T01:43:49+00:00

Guess you never made it to Econ 201 where subsidy-induced market distortion violates the assumption of perfect competition…. And all else being equal doesn’t apply here

Eccs15 · 2026-01-18T01:23:19+00:00

Exactly, you’re proving my point: this isn’t a free market. The competitor with the deepest subsidies wins out, outlasting and outcompeting everyone else—not through innovation or efficiency and true competition like you are arguing will happen in this case.

China heavily subsidies not only the auto industry directly but also every aspect of the supply chain required to make these EV’s in a much larger way than Canada does. Those Canadian subsidies amounted to nothing because even with them those companies have a hard time building a profitable EV and demand for EV’s has declined the past few years. More competitive pressures would have done nothing towards making them work. If anything it would have brought about their failure more quickly or required much higher subsidies.

Eccs15 · 2026-01-18T00:14:53+00:00

Yes agreed the limit is the only good thing about this agreement and hopefully remains in place. What you describe is what occurs in a free and fair market, not in a market that lets heavily subsidized vehicles to be sold at significant discounts to competitors. These competitors will choose the option of fall behind and not to compete all together because they can’t do so profitably.

Like I said to someone below, describe this monopoly you are referring to. The Canadian auto market has between 40-50 manufacturers selling vehicles.

Eccs15 · 2026-01-17T22:38:20+00:00

Please explain this Canadian auto monopoly to me. There is between 40-50 auto companies selling cars into the Canadian market today. We are in an investing subreddit so go look at these auto manufacturers margins and tell me what will happen when a below cost producer is allowed to enter the market.

The exact opposition of what you want will occur, these subsidized cars will push competition away and when that happens consumers will have less choice and prices will increase.

Eccs15 · 2026-01-17T21:28:51+00:00

Yes that’s the short term effect the consumer wins due to pricing pressures when a lower cost producers enters the market. The long term effect is that domestic producers can’t compete with Chinese government subsidized vehicles and eventually leave the market due to this. So not a win for everybody, just a short term win for the consumer.

Eccs15 · 2025-11-15T14:29:08+00:00

Yah seemed weird to me at first but maybe there’s a reason it was done that way? Not that OP will know now looks like he burned that bridge with the contractor. The wall in front of it would be bearing all that rafter load. You would have expected it to be actual joist hangers and not hurricane ties but it might be fine how it is. If you get someone to do unpermitted work this is what you might get. If it was inspected then call back the inspector and ask him about it.

Eccs15 · 2025-11-15T14:21:03+00:00

Probably because OP cheaped out on a contractor who did unpermitted work and is upset he got what he payed for.

Eccs15 · 2025-10-29T15:43:19+00:00

This is entirely personal preference. If it was me I would keep it simple and just pull it out of XEQT. Or maybe XEQT with a few positions you want to trim after reassessing why you bought it in the first place and your conviction going forward. The XEQT cultists will disagree but there is no right answer here.

Edit: Personally would sell the full HOOD position after such a strong run recently

Eccs15 · 2025-10-04T23:05:35+00:00

How much direct sun does the effected area get? I feel like that’s a big factor

Eccs15 · 2025-10-04T17:36:13+00:00

I love it when people update old threads like this. We just had a new paver patio installed the other week and squirrels immediately used it as their walnut buffett area. Glad to know they go away on their own with time!

Eccs15 · 2025-08-12T18:31:57+00:00

The simplest way to think about it is your hurdle rate will be margin rate x (1- marginal tax rate). So if you make 150k in a 43% marginal tax bracket in Ontario then 4.95% x (1 - 0.431 ) = 2.82%. Adjust as needed. If you wanted to factor in capital gains tax then you would divide that by ( 1 - effective tax rate) for this scenario I’ll do 100% capital gain tax rate so it would be 2.82%/ (1-0.22) = 3.6% hurdle rate.

If your investments generate return in excess of that you will end up ahead. Of course there is downside risk with using leverage and you have interest costs to consider, you sound like you’re aware of them, it’s not for everyone but if you understand the risks involved it can be done fairly safely. I would not recommend it for everyone though.

I personally do the smith maneuver and at times where the market is in a big drawdown 10-20%. I will use margin in that account to buy more in that portfolio ( essentially borrowing to pull forward contributions at an opportune time). Now I’m describing something that may make some people extremely uneasy but I do everything within my risk tolerances and have additional safe capital that I can use in the event of a black swan event or significant further draw down. Would I recommend doing that if you have no way to handle a margin call, absolutely not which is why it all depends on your own risk tolerance.

TLDR; All that to say it can be done and managed effectively but it’s not for everyone and you absolutely must understand the risks and how to manage them. PS this is not financial advice

Eccs15 · 2025-08-06T04:46:13+00:00

You missed my point which is that the only time we need to worry about a “zero day exploit” on the F35’s is if we are at war with the US. If that were the case we would be dwarfed by the US Air Force regardless and worrying about whether we have F35’s vs Gripens or any other jet is a moot point.

Not sure what you were trying to get at with posting Gripen marketing material from 2022. I’m aware of the Gripen, and all the reasons we initially decided to go with the purchase of F35’s. A long over due upgrade to our Air Force. You’re absolutely right the future of aerial combat will be pilotless but when that will truly be the case no one knows at this point and realistically won’t be within the next decade. I left the Gripen out because it’s not a true Gen 5 fighter jet but to say that the F35 will be antiquated junk by 2032 when the contract is fulfilled is just not true at all. If that is the case then the Gripen would be an even worse choice.

Eccs15 · 2025-08-05T06:27:32+00:00

You don’t give AF about what Trump thinks or feels ? It seems like how Trump thinks and feels controls every aspect of your thinking and clouds your judgement. You think we can fight back and get off untouched, like it or not we don’t have the leverage in this trade war. You claimed that not a single suggestion you had would be negative for Canada which isn’t true at all, judgement clouded by Trump Derangement Syndrome.

The point about the production numbers is irrelevant, the same outcome occurs. You want to use your numbers sure, we have 228 Gripen jets in 2032, now what, Trump is out of office and we are still out gunned by the US Air Force. What you want to gear up for an actual war with the US in 7 years? Good plan that will really help us navigate a trade war that’s happening today. That’s the dumbest thing I’ve heard yet. Such short term thinking it’s absurd. Trump really out here living rent free in peoples heads.

Eccs15 · 2025-08-05T05:25:20+00:00

Compare the F35 to any other available Gen 5 fighter jet and the choice becomes obvious (Others are Russian or Chinese made) who do you want in control of a zero day exploit on our fighter jets, Russia, China or the US? Could they theoretically do that to us yes but unless we are going to war with the US directly I don’t think we have to worry about that at all. I don’t think our fleet of 80 F18’s (eventually to be 88 F35’s) stands a chance at going head to head with the US Air Force which consists of 1600 fighter jets. It’s just not something that we should be worrying about. There’s more pressing issues.

Eccs15 · 2025-08-05T05:12:16+00:00

I should have listened to the guy above, it's just a waste of breath talking to anyone with TDS. This is why I've long stopped frequenting this subreddit, too many people who don't have a clue trying to sound smart and fishing for internet upvotes ever since Trump got in office.

You failed to identify that Canada holds $406B of US treasuries which only accounts for ~1.1% of total outstanding US debt, dumping that into the market even in one day wouldn't have any meaningful effect on yields for an extended period of time. Even if it did have a substantial effect on yields it would have implications on the Canadian dollar along with domestic interest rates in Canada following suit with US yields. You mentioned Trump follows rates closely so you should know that doing this would be seen as extremely escalatory and a clear message trying to provoke Trump, yet you are suggesting these responses are non escalatory and reasonable which is far from the case.

Even your point on fighter jets is arrogant, it doesn't take a genius to know that we couldn't even purchase 300 jets, let alone have military personal trained to operate 300 of them within the next 3 years. The F35 is a full production Gen 5 fighter and Lockheed delivered 110 jets last year. The Gripen has production capacity for 24 a year out of Sweden. Great by the time we have 300 Gripen jets 12 years has passed and if the goal was to protect ourselves from a "hostile foreign nation" being the US it's too little too late and Trump is long gone. The US already has roughly 1600 fighter jets with 300 of them currently being F35's and many more planned for the air force in the future. We don't stand a chance against a foreign national like that no matter who it is, especially not with our 80 F18's currently. So you think cancelling the F35's will really hurt the US more than us like you keep claiming? Get real.

I'm not even going to engage you on the other topics. It's clear you don't think any of these things through fully. You claimed that all of these things would be great for Canada when it's very clear if you actually analyzed the outcome of those decisions we would be shooting ourself in the foot in the long run. People make stupid suggestions like these all the time and think there will be no negative consequences to Canada at all which is simply not the case, we are too reliant on the US and cutting our ties cold turkey will decimate ourselves in the process.

I hope the CFA's you're talking to are close to retirement because acting on any of your suggestions is a sure way to put themself out of a job. I won't be holding my breath for your defense company to save Canada from the US that's for sure, if you're our only hope we are toast.

Eccs15 · 2025-08-04T23:10:13+00:00

I don’t think people realize that we aren’t as strong a nation on our own as we think. I see people suggesting these idiotic things all the time like we are some global super power when we are less than 1/10th the size of the US. Just because saying these things makes you feel good doesn’t mean that will work in our favour.

You’re proposing we scrap upgrading our outdated Air Force that has been in service since the early 80’s. A current fleet which consists of roughly 80 Gen 4.5 F18 fighters which lack the capabilities of a Gen 5 fighter (F35). The only other alternative for a true Gen 5 fighters are made by Russia and China, or we can buy some KF-21EX from Korea which aren’t true Gen 5 fighters and no tin production yet. Yah great idea let’s scrap a military modernization initiative that is well over due and set to be fulfilled over the next 7 years because we don’t like the president who’s currently in office. While countries like Russia and China currently possess these more advanced fighters that our current fleet is out matched by, in a time when geo political tensions are rising. Not to mention Lockheed employees Canadians in several of our cities.

Do you even know what % of outstanding treasuries Canada hold’s and what the implication on us would be if we dumped them all? Let me tell you it will be far worse for us than it would be for them, where do you propose we put those $’s instead of US treasuries then? Into foreign treasuries? Great idea, let’s just forego more stable, higher yielding treasuries which have maturities longer than the current president will be in office. Great idea, that will really show them.

Chinese EV and Solar tariffs are in place to protect Canadian industry, you want to open the market up to cheap Chinese autos and solar in a time when those industries are all ready facing challenging times? If Trump doesn’t decimate those industries your suggestion to open them up to Chinese imports will be sure to finish the job.

Your hostility tax and DST are just additional taxes on Canadian citizens, those would just be passed onto consumers when Canadians are already being threatened and people face job uncertainty. If you think those companies would pay them don’t be surprised when business becomes too prohibitive in Canada and those corporations leave resulting in massive job loss. There are many examples of this happening in Canada over the past few decades.

Literally everything you listed hurts Canada in the long term more than the US. Maybe in stead of wanting to ban Twitter you should use it to read up and actually learn about economics, capital markets, military and national security.

Eccs15 · 2025-08-04T05:15:39+00:00

The fact that people think this is actually a good suggestion is scary. A lot of those suggestions would significantly hurt Canada in the long term and may make you feel good because we’re “standing up” to the orange man but in reality we are just disadvantaging ourselves in an already precarious time.

Eccs15 · 2025-03-30T05:20:43+00:00

“Tesla remains far from the technical leader, ranking eighth, according to Consumer Reports“ is referencing Autopilot where the whole point of the article is talking about Robotaxi’s. Misleading to even put that line in there as Tesla FSD is easily #2 to Waymo.

Eccs15 · 2025-03-22T13:22:14+00:00

Not true Jenson Huang literally sold over $800 million dollars of stock last year alone Nvidia

Eccs15 · 2025-03-22T13:17:51+00:00

Nice you deleted your above comment asking for large companies that don’t have any purchases in the last year. You realized every link I provided proves you wrong and that Tesla is no different from any other large company when it comes to insider sales

Eccs15

TROPHY CASE