A true Canadian that understands what Canada represents... 🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦

Morgan Stanley: Canada Enters a Path to Higher Growth morganstanley.com/insights/a…

It's about time the NHL seriously pursued this Europe idea instead of focusing on profit and expanding to sunshine American states. Beyond that, long term--this is going to sound crazy--you need to develop hockey in cold Asian countries like (northern) China, Korea and Japan.

Simon Andriesz, the British banker who uncovered 2018 emails linking Howard Lutnick to Jeffrey Epstein’s Adfin investment and took them to House Oversight, has died at age 57. BBC reported his findings. Lutnick later admitted to visiting the island but not the business dealings.

Simon has been found dead, reportedly from "suicide." RIP to Simon and to all whistleblowers who have died too young. The truth about Lutnick will never die

What went wrong for Nike in China? $NKE

When organized crime buys up ServiceOntario franchises... 😂 Said it a million times. Because they have access to all ServiceOntario info - particularly driver's license and registration - it helps them steal cars to order. They know where the cars they want are likely parked.

Everyone's doing their top 9 video games using this site and here are my most played top 9 from the 90s. Best of all time is a different list and I need to think about the recent ones (like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, Elden Ring, Baldur's Gate 3.) my9games.net

90% of X: - Putin is great - EU is evil - Elon is all-knowing - Hitler was a socialist - I hate immigrants - No vaccination - Greenland & Canada are US states - Russia controls Europe - There is no extreme right - I’m not a fascist - I love guns What did I miss?

From 1910. History may not repeat, but it rhymes.

Canada's largest haunted farm opens in Ontario this week blogto.com/radar/2026/09/202…

Gosh, if only there was a KILLER book on the bond market that explained how it worked through the prism of its fascinating 900-year history.

Biggest casualties of a US diesel export ban are, in that order : 1/ Chile + Peru + Brazil + Ecuador + Guatemala + Caribbeans 2/ US Atlantic coast motorists 3/ US Gulf Coast refiners 4/ Mexicans + part of Canadians Biggest beneficiaries : 1/ Refiners ex-US 2/ Deep southern US states truckers Some will say where's Europe in your list ? Well there are 370 mbbls of diesel + 70 mbbls of jet fuel in Europe, fellas ... and this is a cookie cutter case for the mother of all SPR releases. >90 days of consumption and >2y of imports from the US.

People often ask me whether I worry about how frothy the market is. I tell them, "Stocks have already crashed." Inside the market, there is a crash. That doesn't mean they can't crash more. But tons of well-known stocks are down 50, 70, or 90% from their highs. It is hard to see at the overall market level because, at the same time, some big companies have become giants, offsetting losses in the index. I'm not just talking about the SaaS massacre - stocks of many companies that are generally regarded as excellent businesses have been smashed, and almost nobody notices. I've never seen anything like it: the index is so strong, but so many quality constituents are so weak. From ATHs: Nike: -84% McDonalds: -31% CarMax: -63% PayPal: -83% Pepsi: -34% Disney: -50% Dick's: -46% Wendy's: -75% Charter: -72% T. Rowe Price: -52% Campbell's: -71% Constellation Software: -46% Kraft Heinz: -70% Fiserv: -80% Home Depot: -35% Hershey's: -40% Alibaba: -65% Otis: -35% Lululemon: -80% Rollins: -51% Wingstop: -77% Boeing: -55% Lyft: -78% The Trade Desk: -91% Most of those are trading near multi-year lows. These were, and generally remain, large, "good" companies. Now go look at smaller, lower-quality companies, and you will see some crazy sh!t. There is carnage out there.

Ok, we now have the actual text of the Greenland deal (whitehouse.gov/briefings-sta…), so we can say how it compares to the existing 1951 arrangement and who, between Trump and Denmark, lied the most in their framing of it. Long story short - which may surprise some - the Danes lied the most: Trump is pretty much correct in saying that this new deal grants the US control of Greenland. Let's look into what changed compared to the 1951 deal. 1) This is now a permanent arrangement: whereas the existing 1951 deal only lasted as long as NATO existed, this one "does not have an end date and may only be amended by mutual consent." It even survives a hypothetical future independence of Greenland: in that event, Denmark and Greenland must ensure that the independent Greenlandic state "affirmatively assume[s] all of the rights and obligations of the Kingdom of Denmark specified in this Agreement." 2) In the 1951 agreement, the US could set up bases only where both governments agreed, and only on the basis of NATO planning. The new deal locks in three bases: the US can "modernize and expand its activities" at Pituffik, its only base in Greenland until now, and "shall be allowed to establish an additional Defense Area at Narsarsuaq and Mestersvig." Further bases beyond these 3 can be justified by the defense of "the American continent," a US interest rather than a NATO one. Also, quite subtle but this is interesting: Article IV(iii) says that "the United States may establish additional defense areas in Greenland" and that consultations are then held "to decide implementation details based on mutual agreement." What this means is that the principle of a new base is automatically granted and only the implementation details require agreement. Article VII also gives the US "the right to raise concerns regarding construction, or change of use" of any building near a US base, after which the parties decide together what to do. Which means that the US has a say over civilian planning around its bases. 3) On US military movement across Greenland, the wording change between the 1951 agreement and this new one is quite funny. The 1951 text said (Art. V(3)): the US "may enjoy... the right of free access to and movement between the defense areas through Greenland, including territorial waters, by land, air and sea," but only "in accordance with general rules mutually agreed upon and issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland." The new one says: "the United States of America shall enjoy... the right of free access to and movement between the Defense Areas through Greenland, including the Territorial Waters, by land, air and sea." That's it: "May" becomes "shall," and the US military movement no longer has to follow rules "issued by the appropriate Danish authority in Greenland." The US also gets something new on top: "undersea access to and movement within the Territorial Waters," i.e. submarines. 4) Non-NATO exclusion: non-NATO states are barred from military installations or a persistent presence in Greenland unless all three parties approve, giving the US an effective permanent veto. The 1951 deal had no equivalent clause. 5) Investment screening: this is entirely new. "States or investors from a state that is not a member of NATO, a NATO partner, or an EU member state" (i.e. Russia, China, India, the Gulf States, etc.), "shall not be allowed to have (i) control, (ii) significant influence, or (iii) access to non-public information...within Particularly Sensitive Sectors or Activities in the territory of Greenland (including the Territorial Waters), unless agreed between the Parties." Again, it basically means that the US has a permanent veto over who can invest in strategic sectors in Greenland, as far as non-NATO or EU states are concerned. 6) Lastly, in stark contrast with the 1951 deal, the framing of the deal changes significantly: this new deal is largely framed around the US. The 1951 agreement existed only "for the benefit of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization." The new one lists the defense of "the American continent" as an objective, celebrates "the irreplaceable role" of the United States military as well as "the United States' indispensable historical and ongoing contributions to the security and defense of Greenland," and names the establishment of Trump's "Golden Dome" missile defense system as a key goal. So, to sum up: - The US secured a permanent military foothold that even an independent Greenland would inherit whether it likes it or not - The US now has veto power over any non-NATO military presence in Greenland, and over who can invest in its strategic infrastructure and resources (beyond NATO and the EU) - Denmark signed away its say over the principle of new US bases, with only the right to discuss the "implementation details" - Danish authorities no longer set the rules for US military movement across the island - And all of it is now justified by the defense of "the American continent" I don't know in which universe this even remotely "recognizes the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Kingdom and the Greenlandic people's right to self-determination," as Danish PM Mette Frederiksen put it (stm.dk/en/press/press-releas…). Yes, the preamble of the text cynically "reaffirms" Danish sovereignty but, in my book, when you let a foreign country put bases on your soil, move its troops without following your rules and veto who else can come in, in perpetuity, after it spent two years threatening to take you by force, the word for that is anything but "recognized sovereignty" 🤷

What a difference 10 years makes. Markham Rs & Bloor St W at the south east corner. I visited Mirvish Village this past weekend. Lots has changed. I personally think they should have saved at least one sign. ( 2016 Photo: JFVoll / 2026 Photo: Victor Caratun ).

Biggest sign of how far the NBA and pro sports have come on gambling: David Stern wouldn't let Toronto get its expansion franchise in the 1990s until Ontario stopped letting people bet on NBA games. The Vancouver ownership group preemptively reached a deal with BC to do the same. From the great @SmithRaps in his 1994 story: "League officials said they didn't want people 'betting the grocery money' on games and wanted fans 'to cheer for the team, not the point spread.'" David Stern: "It's a principle."

Just off the coast of Newfoundland, there are two small islands: Saint Pierre and Miquelon. They are not part of Canada, but are a self-governing territorial overseas collectivity of France. So, why are those two islands not part of Canada? Let's learn more! 🧵1/9

The IBM Datacenter on Toronto's King Street in 1963

Today’s Daily Cartoon, by Brendan Loper.

Just two dudes playing catch across US and Canadian borders. #GoBills 🦬