Connect with us

Business

When it’s time to consider new windows, here’s what you need to know

Published

7 minute read

Replacement Windows vs. New-Construction Windows ā€“ What Should I Get?

If installing new windows for your home is on your 2022 to-do list, there are two routes you can take. Either you can get new construction or replacement windows. The type you choose depends upon several factors, such as your house, current windows, and their condition.Ā 

If you are new to home renovation, you must wonder what the difference is between replacement and new construction windows. Keep reading to learn everything about both types andĀ where to buy windowsĀ that work best for your house.

What are replacement windows?

As the name suggests, these windows basically replace your house’s old windows using the existing rough openings. They are usually custom-made to fit easily into the current frame.Ā 

Replacement windows are comparatively easy to install than construction windows as they require minimal work, which can be done without touching the trims or the insulation around the window.

What are construction windows?

New construction windows are typically used for newly constructed homes or other new constructions, like a home extension. This does not imply that they can only be used for newly built homes. In some situations, such as intense remodelling or repairing badly damaged existing structures, replacing old windows with new construction windows is the best option.

Replacement windows and construction windows are available in various styles, finishes, and materials. So you can pretty much find a style that goes well with your home based on whichever window is right for your home.

When should I use replacement windows?

Replacement windows are a good choice if your window frames are in good condition and you’re ready to invest in new energy-efficient windows. Generally, these units are used when the wall has already been constructed and cannot be significantly altered. These windows are ideal when:

  • you are replacing an existing window
  • you want the wall to stay in its place as much as possible
  • the window is not going to be used for a new building
  • you want to get the same window style but modern and energy-efficient

When should I use new-construction windows?

Replacement windows are not the ideal option if the window frames in your current home are damaged. In that case, you would need to remove the existing frame. Installing new construction windows is the ideal solution in such a situation. In addition, new construction windows are suitable when:

  • you are building a new house
  • you are planning an extension in your house
  • the wall is being rebuilt
  • the wall is damaged and needs major repairing

Whether you should opt for replacement or new-construction windows depends upon several factors, as mentioned above. However, keep in mind that construction windows are standard-sized windows. So you cannot just plug them into any opening where an existing window was removed from, even if they appear to be the exact same size as the old window.Ā 

Which one is more cost-effective?

When it comes to installing new windows in your home, replacement windows are generally the least expensive option. Because these windows are inserted in existing frames, they typically require less labour making them more affordable. The price for a replacement window may start from $300 per unit and rise depending on the custom features you choose, such as:

  • Frame material. Vinyl here is the most affordable, while wood is the most expensive.
  • Hardware. You can choose standard or opt for elite hardware, customizing locks, handles, etc., to match your preferences.
  • Colour. White, Black or other basic colours will not significantly affect the price. Still, if you want custom shades to complement your exterior and interior, you should expect a price change of around 15%.
  • Glazing. The current standard is double pane windows, but if you live in cold regions, triple pane windows would be a better choice. But the price for these units may be up to 20% higher depending on the glazing andĀ LoE coatingĀ you choose.

Initially, the price of new-construction windows may appear less, but it truly relies on the type and number of windows you order. Since they are standard size, they are produced in large volumes and hence available at a lower price.Ā 

However, the price can significantly increase when you consider the cost of replacing the current window frame and repairing the surrounding interior and exterior walls.Ā 

But installing construction windows can prove to be the most acceptable alternative and the best investment if you’re installing windows in new construction or your current window frames are in poor condition.

Where to buy new windows for your house?

Due to a large number ofĀ Red Deer window companiesĀ in the market today, you will have several options at various price ranges.Ā 

To help you pick the best option for your house, we advise dealing with experienced professionals that offer Energy Star-rated windows, free quotes & consultation and qualified in-house installers to ensure correct installation and maximum energy efficiency for your new windows.

Final thoughts

If you are about to install new windows, choosing whether to get replacement windows or new construction windows is a decision you must make very carefully.Ā 

A new construction window may be a good option in situations like an extension to your home or building a new home.Ā 

However, a replacement window will be more suitable if you plan to replace your existing windows, not changing rough openings and window styles. Opting for custom-made replacement windows means saving yourself a lot of time, hassle, and money in the future.

 

Todayville Content Team works with a wide variety of clients to develop compelling content solutions. Our experienced team develops strategic campaigns that use video and storytelling, digital advertising and social media to help our clients position and distinguish themselves in the market.

Follow Author

2025 Federal Election

Carney needs to cancel gun ban and buyback

Published on

Ā Gage Haubrich

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on Liberal Leader Mark Carney to stop the gun ban and buyback after he announced he wouldĀ  continueĀ with the scheme.

ā€œCarney needs to scrap this plan and stop wasting taxpayerā€™s money on it,ā€ said Gage Haubrich, CTF Prairie Director. ā€œPlanning to spend potentially billions of dollars on a program that is not going to make Canadians safer is a waste of money.

ā€œCarney needs to be cancelling this wasteful plan, not doubling down on it.ā€

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre isĀ promisingĀ to get rid of Ottawaā€™s gun bans.

The governmentĀ saidĀ the buyback would cost taxpayers $200 million in 2019. Only buying back the guns couldĀ costĀ up to $756 million, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Government documents show that the buyback is now likely toĀ costĀ almost $2 billion.

The banned gun list includes more than 2,000 different types of firearms.

Every year since the gun ban was announced in 2020, violent gun crime in Canada hasĀ increased.

New ZealandĀ conductedĀ a similar, but more extensive, gun ban and buyback in 2019. New Zealand had 1,216 violent firearm offenses in 2023. Thatā€™s 349 more offences than the year before the buyback.

Experts also agree that the buyback wonā€™t make Canadians any safer.

TheĀ National Police Federation, the union representing the RCMP,Ā saysĀ Ottawaā€™s buyback ā€œdiverts extremely important personnel, resources, and funding away from addressing the more immediate and growing threat of criminal use of illegal firearms.ā€

ā€œBuyback programs are largely ineffective at reducing gun violence, in large part because the people who participate in such programs are not likely to use those guns to commit violence,ā€Ā saidĀ University of Toronto professor Jooyoung Lee

ā€œExperts say that this gun ban and buyback wonā€™t do anything to make Canadians safer,ā€ Haubrich said. ā€œCarney needs to listen to the experts and commit to cancelling this scheme before it costs taxpayers any more money.ā€

Continue Reading

Business

Timeline: Panama Canal Politics, Policy, and Tensions

Published on

Racket News - YouTubeĀ Ā By Greg Collard andĀ James Rushmore

Hegseth’s visit to Panama includes strongly-worded speeches directed at China

While the trade war with China plays out, another war of political rhetoric is heating up again over the Panama Canal.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was in Panama this week, and pointed out Americaā€™s military presence and joint training exercises with Panamanians. Though he said the U.S. doesnā€™t seek war and that ā€œwar with China is certainly not inevitable,ā€ he had a strong military message for the CCP:

Racket News is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Our relationship is growing in part to meet communist China’s rising challenge. China-based companies continue to control critical infrastructure in the canal area that gives China the potential to conduct surveillance activities across Panama. This makes Panama and the United States less secure, less prosperous, and less sovereign.

He said ā€œChina will not weaponize this canal,ā€ and it will stay that way ā€œthrough the deterrent power of the strongest, most effective, and most lethal fighting force in the world.ā€

Hegseth followed up Wednesday with a similar message to the Central American Security Conference.

The era of capitulating to coercion by the communist Chinese is over. They’re growing an adversarial control of strategic land and critical infrastructure in this hemisphere cannot and will not stand. To accomplish this, our countries cannot face these shared threats alone. We have to face them together. America will confront, will deter, and if necessary defeat these threats alongside all of you, our close and valued partners. Our mission is simple: achieve peace through strength through an America first approach. We’re doing this by restoring the warrior ethos, rebuilding our military and reestablishing deterrence.

Obviously, that didnā€™t go over well with China. Its embassy in PanamaĀ accusesĀ the U.S. of hypocrisy as it ā€œrepeats ad nauseam the ā€˜Chinese interference and influence.ā€™ā€ It noted the U.S. invaded Panama in 1989 and asked: ā€œWho represents the real threat to the Channel? People will make their own judgment.ā€

(In making that judgment,Ā a reminderĀ that the U.S. still controlled the Panama Canal in 1989, and Panama was run by dictator Manuel Noriega who had been indicted in the U.S. on drug crimes. He was also a former CIA informant, and American officialsĀ knew about his crimesĀ ā€” which included helping Pablo Escobar ā€” for years before doing anything about it).

Chinaā€™s influence over the Canal has grown since 2017, when PanamaĀ severed tiesĀ with Taiwan and established diplomatic relations with China. A Chinese company controls the largest port on the Atlantic side of the Canal, and a Hong Kong company, CK Hutchinson, controls ports onĀ both endsĀ of the Canal. Last month, BlackRock, an American investment firm, reached a deal to buy CK Hutchinsonā€™s ports, but that dealĀ could be in jeopardyĀ of falling through. Chinese firms are alsoĀ building a bridgeĀ across the Canal.

President Trump has said the U.S. should have never given up the canal to Panama, which occurred on Dec. 31, 1999, as agreed to in treaties that President Carter signed in 1977 and won Senate approval the following year.

While critics place a lot of blame on Carter, Presidents Nixon and Ford started the negotiations. There was bipartisan support to reach a deal (there was even a tentative deal in place in 1967, but a coup in Panama ended those negotiations) because there were tensions and sometimes violence between locals and Americans. The audio below is from a 1976 NBC story that describes life inside the barbed wire fence that surrounded the Canal Zone: ā€œIts 40,000 American residents, both military and civilian, enjoy a suburban lifestyle.ā€ Panamanians on the other side of the fence were resentful.

Listen now Ā· 6:22

Ronald Reagan changed the political debate over the Canal during his primary challenge to Ford in 1976. Opposition to any deal with Panama became the focus of his campaign. Reagan says in the ad below: ā€œWe bought it, we paid for it, and General Torrijos (Panamaā€™s dictator) should be told weā€™re going to keep it.ā€

The message was effective. Reagan won 24 states, and Ford didnā€™t secure the GOP nomination until the Republican National Convention.

Todayā€™s debate over the Panama Canal

The Panama Canal was not a campaign issue in 2024. Trump firstĀ complainedĀ about passage rates charged to the Navy and U.S. shipping companies in two December 21 social media posts. Trump wrote that if the situation does not improve, ā€œwe will demand that the Panama Canal be returned to us, in full, and without question. To the Officials of Panama, please be guided accordingly!ā€

He repeated those criticisms and threats in a speech the following day:

It was not given for the benefit of others by a token of cooperation, but it was given to Panama and to the people of Panama, but it has provisions. You gotta treat us fairly, and they havenā€™t treated us fairly. If the principles, both moral and legal, of this magnanimous gesture of giving are not followed, then we demand that the Panama Canal be returned to the United States of America in full, quickly and without question.

Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz called that ā€œpreposterous.ā€ House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries also dismissed the idea of regaining control of the Panama Canal.

But Democratic Congressman Jared Moskowitz said Trump has a point. He dismissed the idea of taking the Canal by force, but said ā€œthe United States reasserting its history in the Panama Canal is actually a good, important, strategic issue.ā€

At a hearing in January, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz voiced concern about the bridge that Chinese firms are building across the Canal.

The partially-completed bridge gives China the ability to block the Canal without warning, and the ports give China ready observation posts to time that action. This situation poses acute risks to U.S. national security.

A witness at that hearing, George Mason international law professor Eugene Kontorovich,Ā testifiedĀ that the presence of a Chinese company essentially means the Chinese military has a presence in the Canal.

In a communist regime, distinctions between private and government-owned firms are not as absolute or clear-cut as in a Western liberal society. This is particularly the case for the Peopleā€™s Republic of China (PRC), which has an official doctrine known as ā€œMilitary-Civilian Fusion,ā€ a top-level strategy of the CCP Central Committee since 2019.

Hereā€™s a timeline of key events in the history of the Panama Canal leading up to this weekā€™s speeches from Hegseth.

January 22, 1903

The U.S. and Colombia, which controlled what is now Panama,Ā agree to a treatyĀ that gives the U.S. rights to the land to build the Canal in return for $10 million and $250,000 annually. However, Colombiaā€™s congress rejects the deal.

November 3, 1903

With the backing of the U.S., Panama declares its independence from Colombia.

November 18, 1903

The U.S. and Panama sign the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty, which establishes the Panama Canal Zone and ā€œgrants to the United States all the rights, power and authority within the zone.ā€ The treaty has the same financial terms that Colombiaā€™s Congress rejected. Itā€™s ratified by the Senate and approved by President Theodore Roosevelt in February 1904.


August 15, 1914

The Panama Canal opens to shipping.

January 9, 1964

Panamanian rioters invade the Canal Zone and attempt to substitute the U.S. flag with a Panamanian one. The riots last three days, killing 22 Panamanians and four U.S. troops.

September 7, 1977

President Jimmy Carter and Panamanian dictator Omar Torrijos sign the Torrijos-Carter Treaties. Panama will take control of the Canal on Dec. 31, 1999. President Carter says:

This agreement thus forms a new partnership to ensure that this vital waterway, so important to all of us, will continue to be well-operated, safe, and open to shipping by all nations now and in the future. Under these accords, Panama will play an increasingly important role in the operation and defense of the Canal during the next 23 years, and after that, the United States will still be able to counter any threat to the Canalā€™s neutrality and openness for use.

Panama gains control of the Canal. Army Secretary Louis Caldera, the head of the U.S. delegation at the handover ceremony, says:

The United States could not aspire to be a good neighbor to Latin America and continue occupying and dividing the territory of a country considered a friend.

December 21, 2024

OnĀ Truth Social, President-elect Trump slams Panama for charging the United States ā€œexorbitant prices and rates of passageā€ to use the Canal. He claims that China is influencing the canalā€™s management, before adding, ā€œThis complete ā€˜rip-offā€™ of our Country will immediately stop.ā€

In a follow-upĀ post, Trump adds:

December 22, 2024

While delivering a speech in Phoenix, Trump asks, ā€œHas anyone ever heard of the Panama Canal? Because we’re being ripped off at the Panama Canal like we’re being ripped off everywhere else.ā€

When an audience member suggests taking back the Canal, Trump responds, ā€œThatā€™s a good idea.ā€

Panamanian President Jose Raul MulinoĀ respondsĀ to Trump in a video he posts on X:

Mulino also issues aĀ written statement, citing the Torrijos-Carter Treaties: ā€œEvery square meter of the Panama Canal and its adjacent area belong to PANAMA, and will continue to be. The sovereignty and independence of our country are not negotiable.ā€

He adds that passage rates are determined by ā€œmarket conditions, international competition, operating costs and the maintenance and modernization needs of the interoceanic waterway,ā€ and insists upon the Canalā€™s ā€œpermanent neutralityā€ and ā€œopen and safe operation for all nations.ā€ He also rejects the notion that China wields any special influence over the Canal: ā€œThe Canal has no direct or indirect control from China, nor the European Union, nor the United States or any other power.ā€

Trumpā€™sĀ response:

Trump alsoĀ sharesĀ an AI-generated image with the following caption:

December 23, 2024

Panamanian protesters gather outside the U.S. embassy toĀ protestĀ Trump.

Among the chants: ā€œGet out invading gringoā€ and ā€œTrump, animal, leave the Canal alone.ā€

They burn an American flag and set fire to an image of Trump.

ā€œDonald Trump and his imperial delusion cannot claim even a single centimeter of land in Panama,ā€ says one protester.

December 25, 2024

TrumpĀ postsĀ the following Christmas message:

Minutes later, heĀ announcesĀ that Miami-Dade County Commissioner Kevin Marino Cabrera will serve as the next U.S. ambassador to Panama, ā€œa Country that is ripping us off on the Panama Canal, far beyond their wildest dreams.ā€

December 26, 2024

Panamian President Murino holds aĀ press conferenceĀ to send a message to Trump that the Canal is not for sale.

The Canal is Panamanian and belongs to Panamanians. There’s no possibility of opening any kind of conversation around this reality, which has cost the country blood, sweat and tears.

He also denies Trumpā€™s claim that the Chinese military has any presence in the Canal, saying, ā€œThere are no Chinese soldiers in the Canal, for the love of God.ā€

January 7, 2025

During a press conference at Mar-a-Lago, Trump refuses to rule out using military force to acquire the Panama Canal. He claims that it was ā€œbuilt for our militaryā€ and ā€œis vital to our country.ā€ He once again argues that the Canal is ā€œbeing operated by China.ā€

January 9, 2025

Republican Congressman Dusty Johnson of South DakotaĀ introduces the Panama Canal Repurchase Act of 2025, which authorizes the President and the Secretary of State to ā€œinitiate and conduct negotiations with appropriate counterparts of the Government of the Republic of Panama to reacquire the Panama Canal.ā€

Panama Canal Administrator Ricaurte VĆ”squez tells theĀ Associated PressĀ that the Canal cannot charge lower rates to U.S. ships. He speaks of his desire to ā€œmaintain the established rules,ā€ insists that the Canal is a neutral economic zone, and says that the Chinese companies operating in its ports have no special influence over how the Canal is run.

January 20, 2025

During hisĀ inauguration address, President Trump describes how ā€œAmerican ships [that use the Panama Canal] are being severely overcharged and not treated fairly in any way, shape, or form.ā€ He repeats his assertion that China controls the Canal and closes with the following: ā€œWe gave it to Panama, and weā€™re taking it back.ā€

Trumpā€™s comments prompt anotherĀ statement from MulinoĀ in which he says, ā€œThe Canal was not a concession from anyone.ā€

Panama also sends the statement to the U.N. Security Council.

February 2, 2025

Secretary of State Marco Rubio arrives in Panama City to meet with Mulino.

Mulino attempts to assuage Rubioā€™s concerns about Chinese influenceĀ by announcingĀ that Panama would allow its membership in Chinaā€™sĀ Belt and Road InitiativeĀ to expire. He also vows to allow more U.S. investments in Panama.

Later that day, Trump reiterates his interest in obtaining the Canal. HeĀ tells reportersĀ that ā€œsomething very powerful is going to happenā€ if Panama does not cede control over the waterway.

Secretary of State Rubio is in Panama right now, and we’re talking about the Panama Canal. What they’ve done is terrible. They violated the agreement. They’re not allowed to violate the agreement.

China is running the Panama Canal. That was not given to China; that was given to Panama, foolishly. But they violated the agreement, and we’re going to take it back, or something very powerful is going to happen.

March 4, 2025

A consortium led by BlackRockĀ announcesĀ that it will purchase CK Hutchisonā€™s holdings in the Panama Ports Company, which owns and operates two ports on each side of the canal. CK Hutchison is owned by Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing, and itĀ reportedlyĀ felt ā€œpolitical pressure to exit the ports business.ā€ The deal is worth over $19 billion.

TrumpĀ referencesĀ the deal during his address to the joint session of Congress that evening (1:19:50 of the video below).

[The Panama Canal] was given away by the Carter administration for one dollar, but that agreement has been violated very severely. We didnā€™t give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and weā€™re taking it back.

March 5, 2025

In anĀ X post, Mulino denies Trumpā€™s implication that the BlackRock deal lays the groundwork for a U.S. takeover of the Canal. He accuses Trump of lying.

March 13, 2025

NBC NewsĀ reportsĀ that the Trump administration plans to bolster the U.S. military presence in Panama. Military officials tell NBC that, while the goal is to eventually reclaim control over the Canal, a U.S. invasion remains unlikely.

March 20, 2025

The Chinese governmentĀ threatensĀ to block CK Hutchison from selling its controlling interest in the two Panama Canal ports to BlackRock.

April 7, 2025

A Panamanian governmentĀ investigationĀ finds that CK Hutchison owes the countryā€™s government over $300 million in fees because it did not properly renew its contract to operate its two ports along the Canal. This development has the potential to delay or even jeopardize the companyā€™s deal with BlackRock.

Later that night, Secretary of Defense Pete HegsethĀ arrivesĀ in Panama. He will speak at the reopening of an American port and address the Central American Security Conference. He is the first secretary of defense to visit Panama in two decades.

April 8, 2025

HegsethĀ meetsĀ with Mulino and Panama Canal Authority Administrator Ricaurte Vazquez.

They release aĀ joint statementĀ that says they agree to ā€œstrengthen bilateral Canal security cooperation,ā€ guarantee ā€œthe expedited transit of warships and auxiliary vessels of the Republic of Panama and the United States, improve bilateral cyber cooperation,ā€ and allocate Army Corps of Engineers resources towards ensuring the Canalā€™s sustainability. They also announce that they will move toward adopting a new mechanism for U.S. payment of Canal tolls and charges. The Defense Secretary praises Mulino for withdrawing Panama from the Belt and Road Initiative.

Panamaā€™s version of their joint statementĀ includes an additional detail: It says that Hegseth ā€œrecognized Panama’s leadership and inalienable sovereignty over the Panama Canal and its adjacent areas.ā€

 

Racket News is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Continue Reading

Trending

X