Canadian Politics Thread

[Bob Long]

42 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

Still simply need to pay people more.  Even unskilled jobs. If you look at executive vs employee pay trends over the last 40 years, it's laughable. Low and middle class jobs have not remotely kept pace with inflation. Skilled or otherwise.

 

And as nice as that sounds a lot of people are too busy struggling to pay for food and housing to have time to go to school and better themselves. Only real solution there is paid, on the job training. Those companies should stop waiting, get off their assess and recruit, pay and train people then.

 

Sure but there's going to be a limit on unskilled labour salary that will always be there... Unless you are talking about some version of guaranteed income?

 

Every level and stripe of government has failed on housing in the last decade. Outside of a massive investment in various types of co-ops I don't see a way out.

[4petesake]

19 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Sure but there's going to be a limit on unskilled labour salary that will always be there... Unless you are talking about some version of guaranteed income?

 

 

PEI looking at this.

 

Report reveals five-year effect of P.E.I. guaranteed income

The country’s smallest province could become the testbed for a potential basic income scheme in Canada.

 

https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/more/report-shows-impact-of-guaranteed-basic-income-on-p-e-i-1.6655916
 

 

 

[Alflives]

13 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

PEI looking at this.

 

Report reveals five-year effect of P.E.I. guaranteed income

The country’s smallest province could become the testbed for a potential basic income scheme in Canada.

 

https://atlantic.ctvnews.ca/more/report-shows-impact-of-guaranteed-basic-income-on-p-e-i-1.6655916
 

 

 

Does a person need to be working to qualify and the government bumps them up to this guaranteed amount? Or can someone and their buddies share a house and each collect the guaranteed money? Be kind of sad if this was a giveaway to those who abuse the system instead of getting to those working folk that need a bump. 

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Bob Long said:

 

Sure but there's going to be a limit on unskilled labour salary that will always be there... Unless you are talking about some version of guaranteed income?

 

Every level and stripe of government has failed on housing in the last decade. Outside of a massive investment in various types of co-ops I don't see a way out.

 

No, of course I'm not suggesting flipping burgers should earn you $150k a year. But burger flippers took home a larger percentage of their companies profits 50 years ago than they do today. Executives and CEOs a smaller one. There's no huge mystery as to why there's a shrinking middle class. Wages have not kept pace for any of us not-CEOs/executives.

 

Maybe guaranteed income. Absolutely social housing. Either way you can't have an ever increasing percentage of the population not be able to afford basic necessities. That's not going to end well for anyone. One thing isn't likely going to fix these problems.

[4petesake]

37 minutes ago, Alflives said:

Does a person need to be working to qualify and the government bumps them up to this guaranteed amount? Or can someone and their buddies share a house and each collect the guaranteed money? Be kind of sad if this was a giveaway to those who abuse the system instead of getting to those working folk that need a bump. 

 

It sounds like it would be a universal basic income program if the Province can strike a deal with the Feds. It remains to be seen if this would be an addition to other programs or would replace and simplify certain programs.

 

Whatever your feelings about universal basic income P.E.I. seems like an ideal place for a 5 year test program with a limited population of 18-64 year-olds.

[Optimist Prime]

1 hour ago, Alflives said:

Does a person need to be working to qualify and the government bumps them up to this guaranteed amount? Or can someone and their buddies share a house and each collect the guaranteed money? Be kind of sad if this was a giveaway to those who abuse the system instead of getting to those working folk that need a bump. 

That is the general push back every discussion about the topic. I did some papers for just looking at senior citizens 65 and up, and guaranteeing them 30k a year by 2030. It wouldn't actually cost the nation that much. I think it fully costed out to 3.8 billion and would go down over time. The pushback about even that small segment and low cost was exactly the same. Fear of scammers getting a free ride.

 

I am not at my desktop so that is from memory, but the concept was first seniors in need, then disabled Canadians and then First Nations folks in need. Once those three cohorts were guaranteed 30k a year income, it would almost be universal, the last step would be a relatively small group of able bodied folks age 18 to 65. 

[UnkNuk]

On 11/25/2023 at 2:13 PM, Elias Pettersson said:

At the end of the day, we have a looming economic crisis that could turn into a full blown economic catastrophe. So unless a saviour comes down from the heavens to save us all we are pretty much fooked…

 

Chrystia Freeland was on a talk show today and made an interesting point -  the Bond Rating Agencies give Canada a very high rating.

 

She also mentions this in a recent report:

 

"Underlying these significant investments is our government's continued focus on sound fiscal management. This commitment to fiscal responsibility is the foundation of Canada's AAA credit rating and is ensuring Canada maintains both the lowest deficit and net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7."

 

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/corporate/transparency/plans-performance/departmental-results-report/2023/report.html

 

If things are as bad as you think, why haven't the bond rating agencies noticed?

[4petesake]

18 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

That is the general push back every discussion about the topic. I did some papers for just looking at senior citizens 65 and up, and guaranteeing them 30k a year by 2030. It wouldn't actually cost the nation that much. I think it fully costed out to 3.8 billion and would go down over time. The pushback about even that small segment and low cost was exactly the same. Fear of scammers getting a free ride.

 

I am not at my desktop so that is from memory, but the concept was first seniors in need, then disabled Canadians and then First Nations folks in need. Once those three cohorts were guaranteed 30k a year income, it would almost be universal, the last step would be a relatively small group of able bodied folks age 18 to 65. 

 

Scammers and free rides generally comes up as a reason something wouldn’t work.
 

The Food Bank has always been first on our donation list. A buddy once said that he’d never give money to the FB because there are so many scammers using it as well as parents spending their money on drugs & cigarettes instead of food for their kids. My reply was that I don’t give a shit about scammers, only the people who need  help.
 

Imagine not feeding  children because their parents are assholes or seniors because some punk is abusing the system?!

[Johngould21]

5 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

Scammers and free rides generally comes up as a reason something wouldn’t work.
 

The Food Bank has always been first on our donation list. A buddy once said that he’d never give money to the FB because there are so many scammers using it as well as parents spending their money on drugs & cigarettes instead of food for their kids. My reply was that I don’t give a shit about scammers, only the people who need  help.
 

Imagine not feeding  children because their parents are assholes or seniors because some punk is abusing the system?!

As well as the fb, I also contribute to the "Starfish backpack program" in the school system. Some of these schools in most districts are a huge need for the kids in their schools. Sadly it's a sign of the times, but yes the parents that use their money to buy smokes, drugs, or booze are always going to be out there, but their kids need a decent meal to get through the day. Hopefully, they can break the cycle through education.

[4petesake]

Just now, Johngould21 said:

As well as the fb, I also contribute to the "Starfish backpack program" in the school system. Some of these schools in most districts are a huge need for the kids in their schools. Sadly it's a sign of the times, but yes the parents that use their money to buy smokes, drugs, or booze are always going to be out there, but their kids need a decent meal to get through the day. Hopefully, they can break the cycle through education.

 

Absolutely and thanks for pointing Starfish out in case anyone is interested. That’s something we joined a few years ago here in Abbotsford. 

[Optimist Prime]

43 minutes ago, UnkNuk said:

 

Chrystia Freeland was on a talk show today and made an interesting point -  the Bond Rating Agencies give Canada a very high rating.

 

She also mentions this in a recent report:

 

"Underlying these significant investments is our government's continued focus on sound fiscal management. This commitment to fiscal responsibility is the foundation of Canada's AAA credit rating and is ensuring Canada maintains both the lowest deficit and net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7."

 

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/corporate/transparency/plans-performance/departmental-results-report/2023/report.html

 

If things are as bad as you think, why haven't the bond rating agencies noticed?

we lead the G7 on a lot of economic metrics: the official opposition likes to say Canada is broken and the government can't manage the economy: the best economy in the G7, G20 and by extension the world. give or take a few spots depending on the line item you want to isolate. So what exactly is it that PP will do better than 'top three in the world'? 

Nothing is the real answer and that is why he is very vague on details. he will kill the carbon tax with no other plan to reduce GHG emitions, and the fossil fuel companies will gobble up that small savings in about two weeks and you won't even notice it was dropped by the feds. it is a dumb plan, frankly. 

 

I get there is massive pushback against the current government, but what I would like to know is what folks planning to vote Conservative think they will get out of doing so? Just not Trudeau as the Prime Minister seems like a ridiculous idea, but aside from personal dislike maybe, what can the Cons do better?

 

EDIT: I mean specifically what specific thing will they do better or deliver that the Trudeau Government has not? 

[Elias Pettersson]

51 minutes ago, UnkNuk said:

 

Chrystia Freeland was on a talk show today and made an interesting point -  the Bond Rating Agencies give Canada a very high rating.

 

She also mentions this in a recent report:

 

"Underlying these significant investments is our government's continued focus on sound fiscal management. This commitment to fiscal responsibility is the foundation of Canada's AAA credit rating and is ensuring Canada maintains both the lowest deficit and net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7."

 

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/corporate/transparency/plans-performance/departmental-results-report/2023/report.html

 

If things are as bad as you think, why haven't the bond rating agencies noticed?

 

The reason why our net debt to GDP ratio is the best out of the G7 is because of the changes made by the Chretien government in regard to CPP contributions and how CPP contributions are invested.  Chretien raised the CPP contribution rate, doubling it in 2003 to 9.9%.  This has allowed the CPP fund to increase significantly to around $600 billion.  This amount is deducted from the gross debt as an asset in order to calculate the net debt.  If you instead took out the CPP fund and used our gross debt for calculations, our gross debt to GDP falls to 4th out of the G7 countries.

 

So again, a shrewd move by the Chretien government has allowed Canada to keep its net debt to lower levels than the other countries and also allow Canadians a pension plan that is pretty much insolvent proof through shrewd investing of the money.  With the CPP fund now at around $600 billion, we don't have to worry about losing this pension at any point in our lifetime.

 

"Our government's continued focus on sound fiscal management".  That's an odd statement considering our total debt has increased to almost $1.3 trillion, the Trudeau government promising balanced budgets since 2015 but those budgets have been higher and higher deficits each year, and now we have a $50-60 billion interest payment on the debt every year until eternity.  That sounds like the opposite of sound fiscal management to me...

Edited November 27, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[Elias Pettersson]

11 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

we lead the G7 on a lot of economic metrics: the official opposition likes to say Canada is broken and the government can't manage the economy: the best economy in the G7, G20 and by extension the world. give or take a few spots depending on the line item you want to isolate. So what exactly is it that PP will do better than 'top three in the world'? 

Nothing is the real answer and that is why he is very vague on details. he will kill the carbon tax with no other plan to reduce GHG emitions, and the fossil fuel companies will gobble up that small savings in about two weeks and you won't even notice it was dropped by the feds. it is a dumb plan, frankly. 

 

I get there is massive pushback against the current government, but what I would like to know is what folks planning to vote Conservative think they will get out of doing so? Just not Trudeau as the Prime Minister seems like a ridiculous idea, but aside from personal dislike maybe, what can the Cons do better?

 

EDIT: I mean specifically what specific thing will they do better or deliver that the Trudeau Government has not? 

 

Absolutely nothing has been done about the housing crisis and housing affordability since Trudeau took office.  Our total debt has increased to $1.3 trillion during this time.  We have never had a balanced budget since he took office, even before COVID.  Trudeau literally took over an economy that had a balanced budget in 2014.  Our deficits each year have increased even moreso than what the Trudeau government told us in their yearly budgets.

 

As for the G7 countries, every single one of them other than Canada has changed their government since 2015.  So why does Canada have to continue with the same government over and over again for the next decade while the other countries change theirs up?  Can you explain that?

[Optimist Prime]

10 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Absolutely nothing has been done about the housing crisis and housing affordability since Trudeau took office.  Our total debt has increased to $1.3 trillion during this time.  We have never had a balanced budget since he took office, even before COVID.  Trudeau literally took over an economy that had a balanced budget in 2014.  Our deficits each year have increased even moreso than what the Trudeau government told us in their yearly budgets.

 

As for the G7 countries, every single one of them other than Canada has changed their government since 2015.  So why does Canada have to continue with the same government over and over again for the next decade while the other countries change theirs up?  Can you explain that?

The only thing i can say is 'if the other countries jumped off a cliff, would you want Canada to?

 

The point about other countries changing their governments is 100% irrelevant, it isn't a data point that means anything. Shrug. 

[aGENT]

26 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

The reason why our net debt to GDP ratio is the best out of the G7 is because of the changes made by the Chretien government in regard to CPP contributions and how CPP contributions are invested.  Chretien raised the CPP contribution rate, doubling it in 2003 to 9.9%.  This has allowed the CPP fund to increase significantly to around $600 billion.  This amount is deducted from the gross debt as an asset in order to calculate the net debt.  If you instead took out the CPP fund and used our gross debt for calculations, our gross debt to GDP falls to 4th out of the G7 countries.

 

So again, a shrewd move by the Chretien government has allowed Canada to keep its net debt to lower levels than the other countries and also allow Canadians a pension plan that is pretty much insolvent proof through shrewd investing of the money.  With the CPP fund now at around $600 billion, we don't have to worry about losing this pension at any point in our lifetime.

 

"Our government's continued focus on sound fiscal management".  That's an odd statement considering our total debt has increased to almost $1.3 trillion, the Trudeau government promising balanced budgets since 2015 but those budgets have been higher and higher deficits each year, and now we have a $50-60 billion interest payment on the debt every year until eternity.  That sounds like the opposite of sound fiscal management to me...

 

All parties (rightly) voted for and supported massive handouts during COVID, which I'm going to go out on a limb here, count for a very large portion of that debt/deficit.

 

Would you have preferred the entire economy collapse?

Edited November 27, 2023 by aGENT

[Elias Pettersson]

26 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

The only thing i can say is 'if the other countries jumped off a cliff, would you want Canada to?

 

The point about other countries changing their governments is 100% irrelevant, it isn't a data point that means anything. Shrug. 

 

I would say it is a data point.  Countries don't go for decades with the same people in power.  Not even in Canada.  In the US the limit is 8 years.  They do that for a reason.  Trudeau is already at 8 years and will be at 10 years by the time the next election occurs.  The limit for the majority of our PM's was 10 years.  Even Chretien was done after 10 years and that was after several balanced budgets...

[Elias Pettersson]

36 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

All parties (rightly) voted for and supported massive handouts during COVID, which I'm going to go out on a limb here, count for a very large portion of that debt/deficit.

 

Would you have preferred the entire economy collapse?

 

We haven't had a balanced budget since 2014.  What was the excuse prior to COVID?  Did COVID also cause the housing crisis or was that an issue prior to 2020?

[King Heffy]

4 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

I would say it is a data point.  Countries don't go for decades with the same people in power.  Not even in Canada.  In the US the limit is 8 years.  They do that for a reason.  Trudeau is already at 8 years and will be at 10 years by the time the next election occurs.  The limit for the majority of our PM's was 10 years.  Even Chretien was done after 10 years and that was after several balanced budgets...

The problem is that the piece of **** who would likely replace Trudeau thinks that we can "opt out of inflation" with Bitcoin.  Trudeau is a better choice than someone else with even less understanding of economists who also wants to inflict his barbaric personal beliefs on the civilized majority of us.  The status quo is needed to prevent the pure evil of Poilivre and the vermin he has for a base from destroying this country.

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

We haven't had a balanced budget since 2014.  What was the excuse prior to COVID?  Did COVID also cause the housing crisis or was that an issue prior to 2020?

The housing crisis has been building for about 30 years, multiple governments, Libs and cons

Edited November 27, 2023 by aGENT

[UnkNuk]

2 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

The reason why our net debt to GDP ratio is the best out of the G7 is because of the changes made by the Chretien government in regard to CPP contributions and how CPP contributions are invested.  Chretien raised the CPP contribution rate, doubling it in 2003 to 9.9%.  This has allowed the CPP fund to increase significantly to around $600 billion.  This amount is deducted from the gross debt as an asset in order to calculate the net debt.  If you instead took out the CPP fund and used our gross debt for calculations, our gross debt to GDP falls to 4th out of the G7 countries.

 

So is this tactic fooling the bond rating agencies?  Again, if our financial situation is as bad as you say, why are these agencies giving Canada such a high grade?

 

2 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So again, a shrewd move by the Chretien government has allowed Canada to keep its net debt to lower levels than the other countries and also allow Canadians a pension plan that is pretty much insolvent proof through shrewd investing of the money.  With the CPP fund now at around $600 billion, we don't have to worry about losing this pension at any point in our lifetime.

 

That's good to hear.

 

So how is this economic crisis and possible economic catastrophe that you've mentioned going to manifest itself?

[Johngould21]

With the Cons and the Libs, it's rinse, wash, repeat. 

[Bob Long]

13 minutes ago, Johngould21 said:

With the Cons and the Libs, it's rinse, wash, repeat. 

 

Well... The NDP has never had more power either. Since 2019 they have also played a big part in what we've seen.

 

 

[aGENT]

34 minutes ago, Johngould21 said:

With the Cons and the Libs, it's rinse, wash, repeat. 

 

17 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Well... The NDP has never had more power either. Since 2019 they have also played a big part in what we've seen.

 

 

 

And this is the root of the real problem here. While I certainly will not be voting Conservative, as they're the worst of the bunch by a kilometre, I don't really have anyone to vote FOR.

 

I don't want to just vote "not conservative". But my other options aren't great either. The Libs stay in power largely due to being the most centrist and "not the Conservatives". But their record isn't exactly stellar either. Still not a fan on how they dropped election reform, still haven't done anything about housing, wage disparity still increasing, still need reform on government spending...

[Bob Long]

3 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

 

And this is the root of the real problem here. While I certainly will not be voting Conservative, as they're the worst of the bunch by a kilometre, I don't really have anyone to vote FOR.

 

I don't want to just vote "not conservative". But my other options aren't great either. The Libs stay in power largely due to being the most centrist and "not the Conservatives". But their record isn't exactly stellar either. Still not a fan on how they dropped election reform, still haven't done anything about housing, wage disparity still increasing, still need reform on government spending...

 

Yep. My hope is JT sees the light and steps aside for a better leader before the next election. Slim chance but still, one can hope.

[Johngould21]

27 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Well... The NDP has never had more power either. Since 2019 they have also played a big part in what we've seen.

 

 

What could have been, if Jack Layton were still around. They haven't had leadership since, and likely never will. But, I'll never vote for PP and that Conservative bunch. I also think that many will realize what he's up to if and when he says what he's going to do to "fix" the Country. He's the third of Stephen Harpers hand picked leaders that have failed miserably. I don't trust the man or his qualifications. I've mentioned this before, any leader that marches lock step with a bunch of Freedom Convoy idiots can't have any credibility.