Canadian Politics Thread

[Sapper]

9 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

When i proposed, silly word but a better word doesn't exist for our conversation. I made a proposition to my wife on a rock bluff overlooking some of our stomping grounds as teenagers. My proposition in short was this: "We really like each other, we get along, have never had an argument. Why not get married, and take turns sort of slingshoting each other up along the hurdles of life. You want to go to college, I am almost done mine, I can work while you get your education and then you work while I try to better my situation, and we can do that all the way up the 'chain of life." this was over a few hours time..so heavily paraphrased. She thought that was a great plan and we actually pulled it off. I managed a brilliant career in information technologies and the armed forces/law enforcement/national security, and at peak times she taught an engineering class at the Royal Military College and clerked at the supreme court, with some other career highlights of working with a small government organization that trains and retrains the highest level of bureaucrats when they change ministries. Things like the need for bilingualism, or a ten month crash course in Mining and Resources in Canada or what have you...it is a very niche department where she got to meet and know Ministers in the Federal Cabinet, the highest civil servants and parliamentary secretaries, senators, what have you. We were both highly satisfied with our respective careers at times, and we were both at other times suffering some damages as with any life. On the whole though, we went where we could afford to live, and make our living and only came to this most expensive part of Canada to retire back to where we were raised at the end of our careers. I don't see many people willing to take those risks, adventures and seek their fortunes like that these days, but the young people who do, at least in my family, are all doing very well. of the nephews and nieces who moved away, every one of them owns their own home now. Of the few who stayed put, most are renters. 

That is a small sample size but tells me a lot.  

Back in the early 80's I lived with my grandparents ( they were my guardians ) and on starting out as an adult told them I wanted a place in our same city just like them ....my grandfather Sat me down and showed me pictures of 3 houses they lived before buying the farm and 2 houses they lived in after retiring from farming before landing in their current final home.

 

His message was it's fine to want to end here but you can't expect to just be given what those here had to work a lifetime to get.  Each move added to his skill set and added more people to his life.

 

Youth today don't understand that the very people they want the same as .... Travelled a long journey to get to that spot .. they didn't start there 

 

I left my hometown and liked where I landed so have no desire to go back to live .... But if I did my BC home sold would buy 4 homes outright in my prairie home town ......    

 

We need to stop trying to spend our way to providing homes in every city and instead focus those funds on helping people take trades training and moving costs to help them move to cities that have jobs and affordable housing 

 

Living in Canada and the right to life and liberty may be a birth rite .... Owning a condo downtown Vancouver or Toronto is not lol

[Warhippy]

29 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

compared to the US, isn't this kind of silly to be upset by this? He is a liberal MP after all, his job is to be impartial in the house, not every other part of his work life imo.

 

No.  I ripped loud and long about Scheer doing this exact kind of stuff and smiling smugly about it while Callandra and Poiliverre answered for Harper in the house and derided insulted the opposition or justified their positions for gross statements or actions.

 

His job is to be an impartial voice in the house and we are not the US.  I still believe and expect our elected officials to be better than this.

 

ONce is an accident.  Three or four times is a pattern and if our speaker can not maintain a level of impartiality than the Conservatives Bloc and even NDP are right in that he needs to step down from his role.

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

38 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Once I'm the only person in my family, I'm most likely out of B.C., and living in Eastern Canada.

Price differences means I could put about $100,000 into different investments and use the monthly interest/income as 'toy' money.

 

But then you'll be watching Canucks games that won't end until after midnight local time if you move to Eastern Canada... 

[Bob Long]

45 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

No.  I ripped loud and long about Scheer doing this exact kind of stuff and smiling smugly about it while Callandra and Poiliverre answered for Harper in the house and derided insulted the opposition or justified their positions for gross statements or actions.

 

His job is to be an impartial voice in the house and we are not the US.  I still believe and expect our elected officials to be better than this.

 

ONce is an accident.  Three or four times is a pattern and if our speaker can not maintain a level of impartiality than the Conservatives Bloc and even NDP are right in that he needs to step down from his role.

 

Well, maybe the speaker needs to be something other than an mp? 

[the destroyer of worlds]

If the CONs want the Speaker gone, then maybe they should put one of their top people in his place and then held to the same standards.  I'm pretty sure none of the top CONs will want the job going into an election.  

[Bob Long]

21 minutes ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

If the CONs want the Speaker gone, then maybe they should put one of their top people in his place and then held to the same standards.  I'm pretty sure none of the top CONs will want the job going into an election.  

 

 

part of the problem imo is that we're hung up on "perception" and the bar is stupidly low for this. Who cares about some fundraiser? what harm did it do? for either party?

 

Show me some actual harm by a speaker, from any party, doing a partisan event. 

 

[bolt]

49 minutes ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

If the CONs want the Speaker gone, then maybe they should put one of their top people in his place and then held to the same standards.  I'm pretty sure none of the top CONs will want the job going into an election.  

So the Liberals and the NDP will vote for a conservative speaker?  Maybe a good idea with the poor track record of Liberal speakers.

 

The entire Liberal cabinet has done a terrible job, they should also be replaced.  Most Liberal MPs will probably step down prior to the election blaming other factors instead of their own poor performance.

 

Edited May 22 by bolt

[King Heffy]

11 minutes ago, bolt said:

 

The entire Liberal cabinet has done a terrible job, they should also be replaced.  Most Liberal MPs will probably step down prior to the election blaming other factors instead of their own poor performance.

 

Got any kind of statistics to support this or is this based on feelings?

[Warhippy]

12 minutes ago, bolt said:

So the Liberals and the NDP will vote for a conservative speaker?  Maybe a good idea with the poor track record of Liberal speakers.

 

The entire Liberal cabinet has done a terrible job, they should also be replaced.  Most Liberal MPs will probably step down prior to the election blaming other factors instead of their own poor performance.

 

The entire cabinet?

 

Seems things are actually getting better 

 

Will they get credit for that as well?

 

or will you all of a sudden remember that the bulk of the covid sending was done by ALL party consent, and that much of the issues brought up are in fact provincial; or that we've had a minority government since 2019?

 

Just curious because in todays political world, everything bad in a persons life is apparently the liberals fault but anything good is somehow not

[bolt]

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

The entire cabinet?

 

Seems things are actually getting better 

 

Will they get credit for that as well?

 

or will you all of a sudden remember that the bulk of the covid sending was done by ALL party consent, and that much of the issues brought up are in fact provincial; or that we've had a minority government since 2019?

 

Just curious because in todays political world, everything bad in a persons life is apparently the liberals fault but anything good is somehow not

 

15 minutes ago, bolt said:

So the Liberals and the NDP will vote for a conservative speaker?  Maybe a good idea with the poor track record of Liberal speakers.

 

The entire Liberal cabinet has done a terrible job, they should also be replaced.  Most Liberal MPs will probably step down prior to the election blaming other factors instead of their own poor performance.

 

 

36 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

 

part of the problem imo is that we're hung up on "perception" and the bar is stupidly low for this. Who cares about some fundraiser? what harm did it do? for either party?

 

Show me some actual harm by a speaker, from any party, doing a partisan event. 

 

Because it's against the rules.  But as we've seen the Liberals don't abide by rules.   I guess it's OK too PMJT receives lavish resort vacation gifts because it didn't harm anyone.  It's also OK for a Liberal MP to award Government contracts to their own personal business.

 

 

[bolt]

16 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

The entire cabinet?

 

Seems things are actually getting better 

 

Will they get credit for that as well?

 

or will you all of a sudden remember that the bulk of the covid sending was done by ALL party consent, and that much of the issues brought up are in fact provincial; or that we've had a minority government since 2019?

 

Just curious because in todays political world, everything bad in a persons life is apparently the liberals fault but anything good is somehow not

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canada-is-no-longer-one-of-the-richest-nations-on-earth-country-after/

 

So you want to give credit to an Inept and corrupt Liberal Government?  We're being left in the dust by other nations.  

 

Judging by recent poll numbers luckily your opinion represents a fringe % of the population who think these Liberal clowns are doing a good job.

Edited May 22 by bolt

[King Heffy]

5 minutes ago, bolt said:

 

 

Because it's against the rules.  But as we've seen the Liberals don't abide by rules.   I guess it's OK too PMJT receives lavish resort vacation gifts because it didn't harm anyone.  It's also OK for a Liberal MP to award Government contracts to their own personal business.

 

 

Name one Canadian government that hasn't had that kind of issue.  I can guarantee that electing a party led by a multimillionaire who's never had a real job won't fix that.  Canadians have had their tax dollars wasted for Poilivre's entire adult life to prevent that parasite from starving to death.

[bolt]

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

Name one Canadian government that hasn't had that kind of issue.  I can guarantee that electing a party led by a multimillionaire who's never had a real job won't fix that.  Canadians have had their tax dollars wasted for Poilivre's entire adult life to prevent that parasite from starving to death.

Wait...Trudeau had a real job and didn't get everything handed to him in his life? 

 

Also, the finance minister Freeland had a job related to finance in the past? I guess being having Russian history education and being a journalist qualifies you to be the finance minister.

[bolt]

10 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Name one Canadian government that hasn't had that kind of issue.  I can guarantee that electing a party led by a multimillionaire who's never had a real job won't fix that.  Canadians have had their tax dollars wasted for Poilivre's entire adult life to prevent that parasite from starving to death.

I voted the party who had issues out. Why would I reward easily the most corrupt Liberal party in Canada's history with a vote?

 

Do you not believe in accountability?

Edited May 22 by bolt

[King Heffy]

4 minutes ago, bolt said:

I voted the party who had issues out. Why would I reward easily the most corrupt Liberal party in Canada's history with a vote?

 

Do you not believe in accountability?

I believe in voting for policies instead of outrage.  The Cons are actively promising to make Canada worse. 

 

I'm not about to cut off my finger because of a paper cut, which is the equivalent of replacing Trudeau with vermin like Poilivre.

7 minutes ago, bolt said:

Wait...Trudeau had a real job and didn't get everything handed to him in his life? 

 

Also, the finance minister Freeland had a job related to finance in the past? I guess being having Russian history education and being a journalist qualifies you to be the finance minister.

Freeland did a good job at negotiating a trade deal with a hostile and unstable neighbor to our South, effectively blocked the financing of domestic terrorism during the Ottawa occupation, and in leading the disconnection of Russia from SWIFT.

[Warhippy]

5 minutes ago, bolt said:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canada-is-no-longer-one-of-the-richest-nations-on-earth-country-after/

 

So you want to give credit to an Inept and corrupt Liberal Government?  We're being left in the dust by other nations.  

 

Judging by recent poll numbers luckily your opinion represents a fringe % of the population who think these Liberal clowns are doing a good job.

Opinion pieces aren't facts they're opinions interspersed with just enough information to narrate a position.

 

Some information though pertinent to your position from the article you posted.

 

Nor is this a short-run problem. It has been going on for decades. In the 1950s and 60s, Canada’s economy grew at a rate of more than 5 per cent annually, after inflation. By the 1970s that had slowed to roughly 4 per cent; to 3 per cent in the 1980s; to 2.4 per cent in the 1990s; to 2 per cent in the 2000s. Over the past 10 years, it has averaged just 1.7 per cent. Last year it was 1.1 per cent.

 

So if you look, it shows clearly this has been an ongoing issue since the 80s.  2 percent or lower through the 2000s through 2014 and then roughly 1.7 percent up until last year?  That .3 of a percent is what you're basing your position off of?

 

At some point all this is going to shake Canadians’ sense of their place in the world. If you took a poll, I suspect you would find most Canadians still think of us as one of the richest countries on Earth: maybe fifth or sixth. And at one time we were. As late as 1981, Canada ranked sixth among OECD countries in GDP per capita, behind only Switzerland, Luxembourg, Norway, the United States and Denmark.  But we’re not any more. As of 2022 we were 15th. Over the 40-odd years in between, Canada’s per capita GDP grew more slowly than that of 22 other OECD members. Countries that used to be poorer than us – Ireland, the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden, Iceland, Australia, Germany, Belgium, Finland – are now richer than we are.

 

So essentially things were great until around 81.  81 is our benchmark by almost all of these statements.  it was fine until the late 70s but started to decline in the early 80s.  What happened globally in the 80s again?  Who was in charge in our nation that set this decline off?  Amazingly we're now behind powerhouse nations like Ireland, the Netherlands, Austria, Sweden, Iceland, Australia, Germany, Belgium and Finland.  Do me a solid here, tell me the tax rates for those nations.  Then tell me what controls they have over housing costs, fuel prices and of course food prices.  The highest inflationary drivers in our nation that are causing the highest rates of issue among our population.

 

Knowing this matters but I don't think you care do you?

 

As the postwar baby boom works its way through the country’s age distribution, and as everyone lives longer, the combined effect is to create a society unlike any that has ever existed. By 2040, roughly 25 per cent of the population will be over the age of 65, up from 19 per cent today. Compare that with the early 1970s, when the over-65s made up just 8 per cent of the population. And within that total the proportions over the age of 75, 85 and 95 and beyond will exceed previous records by even wider margins.

(As an example: In 1971, the proportion of the population over the age of 85 was roughly six-tenths of 1 per cent. Today it is more than three times as high, at 2.3 per cent. Twenty years from now it will have doubled again, to between 4.5 per cent and 5 per cent.)  This has two obvious implications. One is cost, particularly the cost of health care. As a rule of thumb, per capita consumption of health care doubles for each 10 years over the age of 55. Now add in the cost of pensions, elderly benefits, and so on. All told, the C.D. Howe Institute’s Parisa Mahboubi calculates, population aging represents a net unfunded liability (promises to pay future beneficiaries of government programs, beyond those for which revenues have been set aside) on the order of $3.9-trillion.

 

So.  The aging population and outflow of money they are taking with them is one of the largest issues in our nation?  Not government spending or policy?  Huh....But we will have to pay them the large regardless up to almost $4 trillion.

 

That’s on top of the unfunded liabilities in the Canada Pension Plan – another $1.2-trillion or so, plus whatever is lurking in the Quebec Pension Plan’s books. On top of the federal net debt of $1.2-trillion. On top of provincial debts totalling roughly $800-billion. Add it up, and that’s an implied public-sector obligation in excess of $7-trillion, or nearly 2½ times our annual GDP.

 

So essentially, one of the largest issues we're facing is our social programs and safety net for the seniors of our nation.  I guess we could just scale that back.  Easy enough.  Cuts to social nets are what the Conservative brand do best and they'll be in office by this time next year give or take.  But then whatever; it's just the pension plan we've all paid in to since we were teenagers.  

 

Now factor in the second implication: relatively fewer people of working age. Not too long ago, there were as many as five workers for every retiree. Before long, that ratio will have fallen closer to 2.5 to one. No doubt increasing numbers of people will elect to keep working past 65, but not enough to make much of a dent in the basic arithmetic of population aging: much higher costs, with fewer people to pay for them.

 

So just raise the retirement age back to whatever it was back in 2012.  If they work harder longer maybe they'll die and that will alleviate the burden right?

 

The only way out is faster growth. It doesn’t have to be a lot faster, so long as it is sustained: that way we get the magic of compounding working in our favour. If we can get our growth rate up, and keep it there, year after year, decade after decade, the next generation or two will be so much richer than we are that they can afford to look after us in our dotage.

 

But our growth rate has been falling dramatically since the late 70s.  What's the magic number here?  Obviously the new guys will have a plan right?  I mean they've been campaigning that Canada is broken for almost a full year so obviously they have a plan right?

 

This is why it is right to call this a growth crisis: at the very moment we most need growth to pick up, it has all but petered out. What makes this especially galling is that it is almost never talked about in our politics. Party leaders hammer away at each other over growth in the short term, though they can do very little to alter it. But long-term growth barely rates a mention.

 

Oh...no.  Guess not.  They don't mention any long term strategy according to this.  They just say it's broken with no actual strategy on how to correct it.

 

The OECD tracks investment across its 38 member states plus nine others. From 2011 to 2015, the growth rate of investment in Canada was merely awful: 37th out of the 47. From 2015 to 2023, it was appalling: 44th, ahead of only South Africa, Mexico and Japan.

 

So prior to the corrupt inept terrible Trudeau it was merely awful.  Now it's appalling.  Because it dropped from 37th to 44th.  Ironically; what isn't factored in here is the level of investment  done within our nation, only outside investment.  

 

Simply put, our workers are less productive than other countries’ workers because they have less capital to work with. As recently as a decade ago, gross fixed capital formation per worker in Canada was within striking distance of the United States: about 95 per cent. It has since declined to roughly two-thirds. A similar decline has been observed relative to the OECD generally.

 

Our workers have less capital to work with.  Which is amazing considering the corporate entities they work under have to a company posted record profits every quarter since late 2020.  One would think all of that profit would go towards correcting this issue and seeing a general reinvestment within our nation and their enterprises here.  Instead we see prices increasing across the board and zero reinvestment of that money in to these companies that would increase capacity and production.  What we see is the government having to invest in it instead which is tantamount to socialization of corporate enterprise with our tax dollars.  

 

But seeing as how this is a general decline across the EOCD generally it isn't just Canada flagging here is it?

 

So this is the issue with opinion articles.  Normally people in the position you are taking just see a headline or take it from someone more eloquent and then regurgitate it as fact without reading the why and the where let alone the who and the when.

 

Everything here indicates that when Mulroney took power in the 80s and effectively tied our economy to that of the trickle down Reaganomics economy of the US lock step and then NAFTA we lost control over our growth and a slow decline became a slide.  It indicates that corporations are absolutely taking the money we are giving them, enjoying the profits and running with it while people blame the government for their lack of reinvestment in to our nation or their enterprises here.  It shows or indicates that higher taxed nations with tighter controls over food, fuel and housing are experiencing far better growth than our own nation 

 

But then this isn't my opinion; this is what you posted and it's not even your opinion let alone suggesting what you think it is.

[Warhippy]

28 minutes ago, bolt said:

I voted the party who had issues out. Why would I reward easily the most corrupt Liberal party in Canada's history with a vote?

 

Do you not believe in accountability?

You keep claiming they are the most corrupt liberal party.  Which is cute.  But who is/was the most corrupt party in national history?

 

Go ahead.  

[AAA]

To the anti-choice ppl

 

What are your thoughts on mandatory vasectomies for all boys? When they hit puberty, quick snip-snip. Low risk, simple procedure that causes mild discomfort for a few days.

 

Better than 9 months of pregnancy for sure, which can come with a host of issues and severe problems.

 

 

[Warhippy]

30 minutes ago, bolt said:

Wait...Trudeau had a real job and didn't get everything handed to him in his life? 

 

Also, the finance minister Freeland had a job related to finance in the past? I guess being having Russian history education and being a journalist qualifies you to be the finance minister.

Trudeau had a job as a teacher.  A snowboard instructor.  As the head of 2 different foundations.  Which means he actually worked and paid taxes even while being a trust fund baby.

 

Freeland was a journalist and reporter for various publications before becoming the deputy editor of a news company, then the managing director of Reuters while also being a published author.  Which means she actually had a job and paid taxes while a private citizen.

 

Since you have issue or take umbrage with her credentials and her current ministerial post.  PLease do tell us who how or what the current Conservative leader has done in his life having never paid taxes from a job in his life has done to qualify him as being the PM?  You obviously have some beliefs about experience being essential to the position so what has he done to suggest he is experienced enough to have earned that honour?

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, bolt said:

Wait...Trudeau had a real job and didn't get everything handed to him in his life? 

 

Also, the finance minister Freeland had a job related to finance in the past? I guess being having Russian history education and being a journalist qualifies you to be the finance minister.

Apparently Trudeau inherited $50 million from daddy. He’s a very shrewd investor though. Very smart investor for a guy who needs help adding 8+6. 
 

He’s definitely a man of the people and can easily relate to the middle class. 

Edited May 22 by Elias Pettersson

[King Heffy]

38 minutes ago, AAA said:

To the anti-choice ppl

 

What are your thoughts on mandatory vasectomies for all boys? When they hit puberty, quick snip-snip. Low risk, simple procedure that causes mild discomfort for a few days.

 

Better than 9 months of pregnancy for sure, which can come with a host of issues and severe problems.

 

 

Definitely not anti-choice, but the reversal is apparently a lot more painful and the odds of success are low.  I was definitely advised to consider it permanent when I had it done.

 

I'd definitely like the procedure to be easier for younger men to have done; there's a lot of hoops to jump through, especially without children.

[Elias Pettersson]

41 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Trudeau had a job as a teacher.  A snowboard instructor.  As the head of 2 different foundations.  Which means he actually worked and paid taxes even while being a trust fund baby.

 

Freeland was a journalist and reporter for various publications before becoming the deputy editor of a news company, then the managing director of Reuters while also being a published author.  Which means she actually had a job and paid taxes while a private citizen.

 

Since you have issue or take umbrage with her credentials and her current ministerial post.  PLease do tell us who how or what the current Conservative leader has done in his life having never paid taxes from a job in his life has done to qualify him as being the PM?  You obviously have some beliefs about experience being essential to the position so what has he done to suggest he is experienced enough to have earned that honour?

So a teacher and a snowboard instructor is enough to land you the job of running the country?

 

That’s a pretty low bar IMO.  But that also explains the fact as to why he can’t balance a budget, even with all that experience of managing daddy’s money. 

[bolt]

It's hilarious the Truanon cult is out here in full force defending the current misfit inept corrupt group of clowns.  The Liberals are down 30% in the polls and continue to fall because of their track record.

Edited May 22 by bolt

[Warhippy]

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So a teacher and a snowboard instructor is enough to land you the job of running the country?

 

That’s a pretty low bar IMO.  But that also explains the fact as to why he can’t balance a budget, even with all that experience of managing daddy’s money. 

Look at you being all smarmy and cute and shit

 

So it's not enough to land him the job of running the country

 

But angry Trudeau with the makeup is somehow qualified to in your statements which is genuinely adorable.

 

But hey, he had daddy's money right?  So obviously that's a bad thing.  Soooo much worse than never having a job but still having tens of millions of dollars over two decades in public office and zero job experience at all.

 

Right?  Petey?  Right?

[AAA]

7 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Definitely not anti-choice, but the reversal is apparently a lot more painful and the odds of success are low.  I was definitely advised to consider it permanent when I had it done.

 

I'd definitely like the procedure to be easier for younger men to have done; there's a lot of hoops to jump through, especially without children.

 

That's fair

 

I think a solution to that would be sperm storage; I know several women who've decided to freeze their eggs at a relatively young (late 20s).