The canadian shield is a rough and rugged strech of land of exposed rock intermixed with swamps. It covers most of the north/central eastern part of the country and it is very difficult and expensive to build settlements on. It also only provides a few pockets of farmland. The land closer to the border is more hospitable for settlements and farming.
If anything, this proves how much Canadians don’t want to be Americans.
Canadian weather is shitty, you can’t grow crops for most of the year. During the fraction of the year where the climate is suitable for growing crops, the variety of things that grow is small compared to what’s possible in the US. And, as bad as winter can be, summer’s no good either. You don’t want to be outside in the winter because it’s -30, and you don’t want to be outside in the summer because it’s +35. The cost of living in Canada is high because you need to heat your home in the winter and cool it in the summer. Almost everybody drives a car because of that “being outside sucks” thing, but cars are expensive to own and operate in Canada. There’s the cost of winter tires, more expensive winter fuels, antifreeze in the windshield washer, plus the constant freeze/thaw cycle wrecks the road surfaces, which results in potholes, which results in more wear and tear on cars. In addition, to make driving safe they drop a lot of salt and sand, which just rusts your car. Because the country is a thin strip, everything is far away, and everything communications-related is expensive. And, a low population relative to the US means that a lot of companies just don’t offer services in Canada because it isn’t worth it to comply with Canadian laws just to get the same number of customers you could get from a single American state. I could keep going on and on.
Yet, despite all that, Canadians huddle up as close as possible to the border for warmth, but refuse to go any further south because that would mean entering the US. As bad as Canada’s climate is, putting up with that is an easy decision to make when the alternative is 'Murica.
One minor correction. The reason Canadians drive is not because the weather sucks, Canadians drive so much because our country refuses to build real transit or walkability. Hell half our country is going to court because a few of our provincial premiers want building bike lanes to be illegal. There are other countries with similar climates to Canada where people don’t need to extensively rely on their car to live their daily life.
Id also say that the biggest factor to cost of living is cost of housing, which is largely related to our cities making it nearly impossible to build any housing that isnt detached single family homes with minimum lot sizes and set back requirements. This also reinforces the car dependancy
Seriously, half the fucking country lives in the Québec City - Windsor corridor and we don’t even have a high speed train there?? It’s a political issue, not a geographical one.
But Canada is “too big” for rail. Except of course all those railways 100 years ago that pretty much made this nation possible, or how nearly every city had trams in most neighborhoods.
except for the places in the north where people CURRENTLY LIVE that are only reachable by train and airplane (not even sure about the last one, might be helicopter if the terrain is shitty enough)
I agree that Canadian cities aren’t doing enough to build mass transit. But, I still think winter has a lot to do with that.
Mass transit means waiting outside for a bus or tram, and waiting outside when it’s either +35 or -30 sucks. Many people will prefer cars for that reason. It isn’t the only factor, but it is definitely a factor.
As for bike lanes, winter is a major factor. It’s certainly possible to bike in the winter, I’ve done it for many years, but it isn’t easy. In Canada as it exists now, biking in winter means biking in traffic most of the time. Bike lanes exist, but often in winter they just shove the snow to the side of the road and block the bike lanes. I don’t know of anywhere in Canada where they clear bike lanes as a priority. That could be done. It is done in some places in Finland, for example. But, there’s a catch 22. It’s not worth it to clear the bike lanes because there aren’t enough winter bikers; there aren’t enough winter bikers because it’s dangerous and unpleasant to bike during winter because they don’t clear the bike lanes.
The video says that there were more than 500,000 bike share trips in Toronto in the winter months. Let’s be conservative and say that “the winter months” are just December, January and February. The reality is that there’s ice on the ground until May pretty often, but let’s just pretend it’s 500,000 trips in 3 months to make the numbers seem as big as possible.
Is that big? Not really, 500,000 trips in 3 months is 167,000 trips per month. Meanwhile in the summer it’s 1 million trips per month. So, cycling drops by a factor of at least 6 in the winter. That’s massive.
And yes, I’ve watched that Not Just Bikes video. It makes the point that in order for people to bike in the winter, you need massive infrastructure that Canada refuses to spend on. The city in question in the video, Oulu, makes it a priority to clear the bike routes within 3 hours of a 2 cm snowfall. Theoretically could that be done in every rich city in the world? Sure. Is it realistic it will ever happen anywhere in Canada? Doubtful.
I stand by what I said, “winter is a major factor”. Do you have any idea how much it would cost to commit to clearing all the bike routes within 3 hours of a 2 cm snowfall? You could argue that the cost is worth it, and that the cost is smaller than doing similar things for cars, but it remains a major factor.
Besides, it wouldn’t even make sense to have snow clearing like Oulu unless they first built a dedicated bike network for the city. There’s no point in just clearing the “bike lanes” which are just a tiny strip of pavement next to the gutter.
Canadian cities aren’t doing enough to build mass transit and bike lanes. But, even if they did, the weather sucks in the winter. And Oulu, is colder than Toronto. But it’s slightly warmer than Ottawa and Montreal, and significantly warmer than Winnipeg, Edmonton and Calgary. So, even if you replicated all the bike lanes from Oulu, committed to clearing the snow as quickly as they do in Oulu and made cars and fuel as expensive as they are in Europe, Canada would probably have nowhere near the number of winter bikers as Oulu per capita. Canada is much colder, cities are designed around cars, and people have “car brain”.
All the problems you’ve described are infrastructure abd policy problems We can build climate controlled mass transit stations. We can maintain separated and safe bicycle networks in the winter. We can clear pedestrian pathways of snow instead of plowing the car lane snow onto them. Its all policy and infrastructure. If you make transit the fastest while being convenient and clean, people will use it over cars because it takes less time, not everyone, but certainly enough to make it worth it.
We can’t fairly use the there are no cyclists now argument because we haven’t given them any real options. We need to provide safe and effecient cycling infrastructure to truly see how many people would prefer to bike. If a city had no roads you could make the argument not to build any roads because nobody drives anyway.
It’s not just that. Trains don’t run as well or brake as efficiently in cold weather, they have slippery metal rails for a reason. That’s why we switched to cars and trucks too readily, and as sad as that is, I think we might need electric cars more than Americans ever needed any cars.
(That said, electric cars should be thanks to electrified smartroads, not stuffing the car itself full of computer hardware.)
Do you have a source for this? Our cargo trains run through some pretty frigid winters. Many European countries have a similar climate and they have trains. Aren’t the swiss famous for sending trains through snowy mountains?
Yes, and tunnels too. The issue’s not just the temperature but the altitude, at least on the west coast, and lack of adhesion rail or deep bore passenger train tunnels on Canadian mountain routes. On the flat lands eastwards it’s mostly that passenger engines are built differently than freight locomotives that makes the difference.
The problem can be fixed, but is it worth it? Maybe. Sadly, no politicians here seem too interested in building rail services in BC, unless it’s to feed the KelVicVanSeaTac metro-economic machine.
I will say I was trying to make something resembling small talk, so I admit I’m wrong if you know otherwise. Just as far as I’ve seen, that’s what seems to be the truth.
trains are the most reliable mode of transport in winter conditions, the fact that they’re so monstrously heavy and have tiny points of contact with the rails means they will simply squeeze out snow and crush ice, no plowing needed.
go ahead and try to drive a car through 20cm of slushy snow, it ain’t happening.
You’re right, except in British Columbia where all the most expensive highways were built. Not better, but affordable because Vancouver, Victoria and Kelowna dgaf about the rest of the province and outnumber everywhere else. If we didn’t have all these tourist-focused roads, they’d have still torn up the rails and left us to drown.
Canadian here, you summed it up perfectly. Everyone I know would agree with your points exactly. It’s a bit of a shit deal living here sometimes, but it’s infinitely better than being an American. Just look at the amount of disgust a Canadian tourist has when asked if they’re American when visiting overseas.
Canada should join the Nordic countries in a new Kalmar Union. Everything you mentioned is in common, unlike USA and EU, which both span different climates, and thus different ways of life.
Don’t get me wrong, I like both EU and the former USA, but I think there’s just more mutual ground in latitude than longitudes.
Canada should really just wait until the US collapses and then move south into the wreckage.
The Nordic countries don’t understand bad climate. Maybe they want to continue existing as they are, but Canadians will want to move south as soon as the US destroys itself.
Measure
Oslo
Stockholm
Helsinki
Ottawa
Coldest Mean Daily Minimum
-4.7
-3.2
-6.3
-14
Coldest Mean Minimum
-15.9
-13.7
-20.6
-27
Coldest Record Low
-26.0
-28.2
-35
-38.9
Hottest Mean Maximum
29.6
30.6
27.9
32
Hottest Record High
34.6
35.4
33.2
37.8
Ottawa is significantly colder than those country’s capitals during the winter, and significantly hotter in the summer. It might be unpleasant at times to live in those European climates, but it’s truly miserable to live in Ottawa for much of the year.
People in the Nordic countries might want to stay there because it’s the only place where their language is spoken, or because there are thousands of years of tradition in living there. Meanwhile, Canada as a country is barely 150 years old, and speaks the same language (with roughly the same accent) as the neighbour to the south.
There’s a lot in common in terms of culture too. Sure, Canada plays a bit more hockey than the southerners, but they have the NHL too. The other sports are largely shared: Toronto has NBA and MLB teams. Unlike Europe where “futbol” is big, it’s pretty small in the English-speaking part of North America, but to the extent it exists, Canada is part of the same system, with teams in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal. The only split is that Canada plays a superior version of gridiron football with far inferior players, and the US has a mass market hugely popular version of gridiron football with worse rules but much better players.
Canadians watch the same TV shows and movies, and listen to the same music. Many of the stars of stage and screen in the US are actually Canadian, and many shows that are set in the US and air on US TV are actually filmed in Canada.
So really, there isn’t a lot that Canada has in common with the Nordic countries. I like the idea of working more with the EU and less with the US, but culturally Canadians are part of the English-speaking North American culture… except when it comes to politics, guns, and healthcare.
I just hope the US hurries its collapse up so that the remnants of the fractured states can petition to join Canada and the border can be shifted down. Then Canadians can move to a more hospitable climate without having to abandon the parts of their culture that matter.
Meanwhile they have wheatfields 4 hours north of Edmonton. Posts like this always remind me how much I hate most Canadians and their whiny, weak, entitled, arrogant, half clever bullshit.
85% of Canadians live within 100 miles of the American border. And yous claim you don’t want to be part of them.
*(runs and hides)*
We stand on guard.
The average Canadian
Yes, but instead of guarding against white walkers from the north it’s pedos from the south.
And in this case winter is going, as global temperatures rise
Summer is coming. ⛱️🕶️☀️🧴
Oh fuck… winter is cumming ☹️
I would not throw pedo-shaped stones in a Canadian shaped house. For every Jeffery Epstein there’s a Peter Nygard.
In Canada pedo businessmen go to prison. In the US pedo businessmen go to the White House. We are not the same.
Muh Queen!
Every Canadian knows that the secret forests of magical splendour begin 101 miles from the border.
yukon is where all the magic is.
What exactly are you guarding? I figure there’s a reason not many people live outside of that area depicted.
The guards are facing south.
The canadian shield is a rough and rugged strech of land of exposed rock intermixed with swamps. It covers most of the north/central eastern part of the country and it is very difficult and expensive to build settlements on. It also only provides a few pockets of farmland. The land closer to the border is more hospitable for settlements and farming.
… is that USAins can’t read maps. With any luck we’ll just end up re-invading Connecticut.
Have you seen Game of Thrones?
For thee?
If anything, this proves how much Canadians don’t want to be Americans.
Canadian weather is shitty, you can’t grow crops for most of the year. During the fraction of the year where the climate is suitable for growing crops, the variety of things that grow is small compared to what’s possible in the US. And, as bad as winter can be, summer’s no good either. You don’t want to be outside in the winter because it’s -30, and you don’t want to be outside in the summer because it’s +35. The cost of living in Canada is high because you need to heat your home in the winter and cool it in the summer. Almost everybody drives a car because of that “being outside sucks” thing, but cars are expensive to own and operate in Canada. There’s the cost of winter tires, more expensive winter fuels, antifreeze in the windshield washer, plus the constant freeze/thaw cycle wrecks the road surfaces, which results in potholes, which results in more wear and tear on cars. In addition, to make driving safe they drop a lot of salt and sand, which just rusts your car. Because the country is a thin strip, everything is far away, and everything communications-related is expensive. And, a low population relative to the US means that a lot of companies just don’t offer services in Canada because it isn’t worth it to comply with Canadian laws just to get the same number of customers you could get from a single American state. I could keep going on and on.
Yet, despite all that, Canadians huddle up as close as possible to the border for warmth, but refuse to go any further south because that would mean entering the US. As bad as Canada’s climate is, putting up with that is an easy decision to make when the alternative is 'Murica.
One minor correction. The reason Canadians drive is not because the weather sucks, Canadians drive so much because our country refuses to build real transit or walkability. Hell half our country is going to court because a few of our provincial premiers want building bike lanes to be illegal. There are other countries with similar climates to Canada where people don’t need to extensively rely on their car to live their daily life.
Id also say that the biggest factor to cost of living is cost of housing, which is largely related to our cities making it nearly impossible to build any housing that isnt detached single family homes with minimum lot sizes and set back requirements. This also reinforces the car dependancy
Seriously, half the fucking country lives in the Québec City - Windsor corridor and we don’t even have a high speed train there?? It’s a political issue, not a geographical one.
But Canada is “too big” for rail. Except of course all those railways 100 years ago that pretty much made this nation possible, or how nearly every city had trams in most neighborhoods.
And the Trans-Siberian railway has existed for years, is thousands of miles long in awful conditions, AND electrified. We don’t have an excuse.
Isn’t there an HST project’s route being prospected between Calgary and Edmonton?
except for the places in the north where people CURRENTLY LIVE that are only reachable by train and airplane (not even sure about the last one, might be helicopter if the terrain is shitty enough)
I agree that Canadian cities aren’t doing enough to build mass transit. But, I still think winter has a lot to do with that.
Mass transit means waiting outside for a bus or tram, and waiting outside when it’s either +35 or -30 sucks. Many people will prefer cars for that reason. It isn’t the only factor, but it is definitely a factor.
As for bike lanes, winter is a major factor. It’s certainly possible to bike in the winter, I’ve done it for many years, but it isn’t easy. In Canada as it exists now, biking in winter means biking in traffic most of the time. Bike lanes exist, but often in winter they just shove the snow to the side of the road and block the bike lanes. I don’t know of anywhere in Canada where they clear bike lanes as a priority. That could be done. It is done in some places in Finland, for example. But, there’s a catch 22. It’s not worth it to clear the bike lanes because there aren’t enough winter bikers; there aren’t enough winter bikers because it’s dangerous and unpleasant to bike during winter because they don’t clear the bike lanes.
Yawn
But actually, even in Canada. And even with bike share programs.
So actually:
Is all you need. End of post.
The video says that there were more than 500,000 bike share trips in Toronto in the winter months. Let’s be conservative and say that “the winter months” are just December, January and February. The reality is that there’s ice on the ground until May pretty often, but let’s just pretend it’s 500,000 trips in 3 months to make the numbers seem as big as possible.
Is that big? Not really, 500,000 trips in 3 months is 167,000 trips per month. Meanwhile in the summer it’s 1 million trips per month. So, cycling drops by a factor of at least 6 in the winter. That’s massive.
And yes, I’ve watched that Not Just Bikes video. It makes the point that in order for people to bike in the winter, you need massive infrastructure that Canada refuses to spend on. The city in question in the video, Oulu, makes it a priority to clear the bike routes within 3 hours of a 2 cm snowfall. Theoretically could that be done in every rich city in the world? Sure. Is it realistic it will ever happen anywhere in Canada? Doubtful.
I stand by what I said, “winter is a major factor”. Do you have any idea how much it would cost to commit to clearing all the bike routes within 3 hours of a 2 cm snowfall? You could argue that the cost is worth it, and that the cost is smaller than doing similar things for cars, but it remains a major factor.
Besides, it wouldn’t even make sense to have snow clearing like Oulu unless they first built a dedicated bike network for the city. There’s no point in just clearing the “bike lanes” which are just a tiny strip of pavement next to the gutter.
Canadian cities aren’t doing enough to build mass transit and bike lanes. But, even if they did, the weather sucks in the winter. And Oulu, is colder than Toronto. But it’s slightly warmer than Ottawa and Montreal, and significantly warmer than Winnipeg, Edmonton and Calgary. So, even if you replicated all the bike lanes from Oulu, committed to clearing the snow as quickly as they do in Oulu and made cars and fuel as expensive as they are in Europe, Canada would probably have nowhere near the number of winter bikers as Oulu per capita. Canada is much colder, cities are designed around cars, and people have “car brain”.
Snow plows for roads exist and often just run and run and run to keep roads open.
This is the counter to your whole point my guy.
It’s will not ability
Which is very expensive, but necessary because of the shitty climate. What’s your point?
All the problems you’ve described are infrastructure abd policy problems We can build climate controlled mass transit stations. We can maintain separated and safe bicycle networks in the winter. We can clear pedestrian pathways of snow instead of plowing the car lane snow onto them. Its all policy and infrastructure. If you make transit the fastest while being convenient and clean, people will use it over cars because it takes less time, not everyone, but certainly enough to make it worth it.
We can’t fairly use the there are no cyclists now argument because we haven’t given them any real options. We need to provide safe and effecient cycling infrastructure to truly see how many people would prefer to bike. If a city had no roads you could make the argument not to build any roads because nobody drives anyway.
It’s not just that. Trains don’t run as well or brake as efficiently in cold weather, they have slippery metal rails for a reason. That’s why we switched to cars and trucks too readily, and as sad as that is, I think we might need electric cars more than Americans ever needed any cars.
(That said, electric cars should be thanks to electrified smartroads, not stuffing the car itself full of computer hardware.)
Do you have a source for this? Our cargo trains run through some pretty frigid winters. Many European countries have a similar climate and they have trains. Aren’t the swiss famous for sending trains through snowy mountains?
They certainly are. They have some of the steepest adhesion railways in the world on those mountains.
Yes, and tunnels too. The issue’s not just the temperature but the altitude, at least on the west coast, and lack of adhesion rail or deep bore passenger train tunnels on Canadian mountain routes. On the flat lands eastwards it’s mostly that passenger engines are built differently than freight locomotives that makes the difference.
The problem can be fixed, but is it worth it? Maybe. Sadly, no politicians here seem too interested in building rail services in BC, unless it’s to feed the KelVicVanSeaTac metro-economic machine.
I will say I was trying to make something resembling small talk, so I admit I’m wrong if you know otherwise. Just as far as I’ve seen, that’s what seems to be the truth.
trains are the most reliable mode of transport in winter conditions, the fact that they’re so monstrously heavy and have tiny points of contact with the rails means they will simply squeeze out snow and crush ice, no plowing needed.
go ahead and try to drive a car through 20cm of slushy snow, it ain’t happening.
You’re right, except in British Columbia where all the most expensive highways were built. Not better, but affordable because Vancouver, Victoria and Kelowna dgaf about the rest of the province and outnumber everywhere else. If we didn’t have all these tourist-focused roads, they’d have still torn up the rails and left us to drown.
Canadian here, you summed it up perfectly. Everyone I know would agree with your points exactly. It’s a bit of a shit deal living here sometimes, but it’s infinitely better than being an American. Just look at the amount of disgust a Canadian tourist has when asked if they’re American when visiting overseas.
Canada should join the Nordic countries in a new Kalmar Union. Everything you mentioned is in common, unlike USA and EU, which both span different climates, and thus different ways of life.
Don’t get me wrong, I like both EU and the former USA, but I think there’s just more mutual ground in latitude than longitudes.
Canada should really just wait until the US collapses and then move south into the wreckage.
The Nordic countries don’t understand bad climate. Maybe they want to continue existing as they are, but Canadians will want to move south as soon as the US destroys itself.
Ottawa is significantly colder than those country’s capitals during the winter, and significantly hotter in the summer. It might be unpleasant at times to live in those European climates, but it’s truly miserable to live in Ottawa for much of the year.
People in the Nordic countries might want to stay there because it’s the only place where their language is spoken, or because there are thousands of years of tradition in living there. Meanwhile, Canada as a country is barely 150 years old, and speaks the same language (with roughly the same accent) as the neighbour to the south.
There’s a lot in common in terms of culture too. Sure, Canada plays a bit more hockey than the southerners, but they have the NHL too. The other sports are largely shared: Toronto has NBA and MLB teams. Unlike Europe where “futbol” is big, it’s pretty small in the English-speaking part of North America, but to the extent it exists, Canada is part of the same system, with teams in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal. The only split is that Canada plays a superior version of gridiron football with far inferior players, and the US has a mass market hugely popular version of gridiron football with worse rules but much better players.
Canadians watch the same TV shows and movies, and listen to the same music. Many of the stars of stage and screen in the US are actually Canadian, and many shows that are set in the US and air on US TV are actually filmed in Canada.
So really, there isn’t a lot that Canada has in common with the Nordic countries. I like the idea of working more with the EU and less with the US, but culturally Canadians are part of the English-speaking North American culture… except when it comes to politics, guns, and healthcare.
I just hope the US hurries its collapse up so that the remnants of the fractured states can petition to join Canada and the border can be shifted down. Then Canadians can move to a more hospitable climate without having to abandon the parts of their culture that matter.
You just described Minnesota, minus the part about the services.
Only correction is that gas is a bit cheaper in the winter
Meanwhile they have wheatfields 4 hours north of Edmonton. Posts like this always remind me how much I hate most Canadians and their whiny, weak, entitled, arrogant, half clever bullshit.
Ooh, wheat! Great. What about fruits? They’re important for a balanced diet.
It turns out that Canada imports 50% of its vegetables and 75% of its fruit.
But do go on, tell me how Canada’s climate isn’t limiting in what it can produce domestically.
oh look it’s you.
Give it a rest dude, go touch some grass.
Some mindless blather about fruit is all you got? There’s fucking vineyards in Saskatchewan.
Give it a rest dude, go touch some grass.
This country could and should be self sufficient, it nearly was not 60 years ago. Go scrub your ass.
Your instance saved you 😄
Who are you running and hiding from?
The Canada goose.
Hell, the US is all they talk about here on lemmy. I’m not sure they don’t want to join either.
Kind of like all you would talk about is the festering boil in the middle of your face.
Edit: I misread your comment, apologies.
Have you seen Canadians during war? I’ll definitely pass on that, thanks.