Canadian Politics Thread

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

1 hour ago, Bob Long said:

 

 "corrupt" "gaslighting" "parents rights" "freedoms" "pronouns"

 

I guess why have your own ideas when you can just wait for the Tea Party/MAGA to hand them to you. 

Don't forget "Liberal media".

[King Heffy]

2 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Don't forget "Liberal media".

And then telling people to "wake up" while complaining everything they don't like is "woke".

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

52 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

Give me specifics. What are your top 3 corruption issues?

 

My guess is they'll say - Aga Khan, SNC, and ArriveCan (amongst others).

 

Oh shit, did I do their homework for them?  

[Warhippy]

2 hours ago, Ricky Ravioli said:

Now do the same with Trudeau while he's been Prime Minister. Definitely nothing similar going on right?

but...you already said/say that they're corrupt.

 

I just like pointing out the obvious and have a long history of showing people how hypocritical they are

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, bolt said:

So every member of Parliament is a Nazi now?  Everyone who stood is a Nazi?

That's literally the road you're taking so yes why not?

 

Or, is it different now because I pointed out that Pierre was also standing and clapping like a seal for the guy and situation you posted?

 

Guess pointing that out isn't sitting well with ya eh?

[Bob Long]

9 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Don't forget "Liberal media".

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, bolt said:

If you can't see the corruption and incompetence of the last 9 years I don't know what to tell you.  

 

There will be no vote regarding abortion, that is just pure gaslighting by the Liberals because they are so far behind in the polls.

Show us the corruption.

I posted exactly what it was here and how it literally word for word described Pierre Poiliverre so show us how it applies to ALL the Libs.

 

Come on now, do the work

[Warhippy]

44 minutes ago, 112 said:

The Liberals are bad, but that doesn't make the Conservatives a better option. I don't understand how people can look at the state of affairs in our politics and come to the conclusion that we're better off under a Poilievre rule. He's going to gut public services and cut taxes for his rich lobbyist buddies (read: corruption). He's openly said that he will craft laws against transgender individuals. His statements concerning the notwithstanding clause are themselves concerning. He would do his best to federally take the compassion out of our approach to people with addictions and only make the problem worse. "Axing the tax" is probably the dumbest thing anyone has ever came up with on the topic of carbon taxes and does not inspire hope in other areas of environmental concern. He'd rather we spend generations facing billions of dollars (increasing yearly) in annual climate losses than be proactive in how we treat climate change. His social policies are outdated and riddled with bigotry; this is a guy who voted against gay marriage back in the aughts. Again, the Liberals are bad, but people are picking the cyanide over a more mild toxin when they back up Poilievre.

 

Most of the things he says he'll "fix" aren't even under federal government control. Runaway inflation? Clearly it's the Liberal's fault and not a global issue. Affordability in housing? Historically, mostly a provincial and municipal matter, although I agree it requires federal interest at this point--but what would he even do? Short of socializing housing there's not going to be a major shift for the better in the next 20 years (or forever). To make up for cuts in taxation he'll put the burden on workers and seniors, affecting people's retirements. He's not a blue collar working man as much as he tries to market himself that way. He's a rich guy who doesn't have to worry about things the common person frets about daily and who only actually "works" roughly half the year. The majority of the country will be worse off after 6-18 months of Conservative rule.

What's even more awful is there's basically a video where he mocks the current government for having investe din programs that have helped people and where is basically stating he will get rid of them.

 

That video was posted as a "making the libs cry and pwning them" which means people are actually applauding and cheering for the idea of having the very benefits and systems people rely on stripped from them.  Absolutely ridiculous honestly.

 

People are so fucking ignorant and stupid based on partisan ideology and misinformation that they'll applaud as any and all protections that exist to buffer them from higher costs, less services or the benefits they've paid in to for decades are removed and erased.

 

I mean I too guess I don't mind if someone burns my house down on a cold night because at least I'll be warm for a moment.

[Gurn]

16 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

That's literally the road you're taking so yes why not?

 

Or, is it different now because I pointed out that Pierre was also standing and clapping like a seal for the guy and situation you posted?

 

Guess pointing that out isn't sitting well with ya eh?

not just Pierre- but everyone in his party. Thus they are al NAZIs, or they all got caught, giving ritual applause to a man with an history, that was unknown to them.

Me- I'm leaning to the latter.

 

[Bob Long]

23 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

What's even more awful is there's basically a video where he mocks the current government for having investe din programs that have helped people and where is basically stating he will get rid of them.

 

That video was posted as a "making the libs cry and pwning them" which means people are actually applauding and cheering for the idea of having the very benefits and systems people rely on stripped from them.  Absolutely ridiculous honestly.

 

People are so fucking ignorant and stupid based on partisan ideology and misinformation that they'll applaud as any and all protections that exist to buffer them from higher costs, less services or the benefits they've paid in to for decades are removed and erased.

 

I mean I too guess I don't mind if someone burns my house down on a cold night because at least I'll be warm for a moment.

 

There's a weird cruelty to the cpc base now. 

[Bure_Pavel]

38 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

What's even more awful is there's basically a video where he mocks the current government for having investe din programs that have helped people and where is basically stating he will get rid of them.

 

That video was posted as a "making the libs cry and pwning them" which means people are actually applauding and cheering for the idea of having the very benefits and systems people rely on stripped from them.  Absolutely ridiculous honestly.

 

People are so fucking ignorant and stupid based on partisan ideology and misinformation that they'll applaud as any and all protections that exist to buffer them from higher costs, less services or the benefits they've paid in to for decades are removed and erased.

 

I mean I too guess I don't mind if someone burns my house down on a cold night because at least I'll be warm for a moment.

If the removal of services is coupled with lower taxes, then its not as big of a deal as it means more money in peoples pockets to spend on what they want whether that be certain services or goods. If the government is launching well run cost effective services taking advantage of economies of scale for the public, its a huge win for everyone. But it doesn't seem like that is the case, as there are too many inefficiencies in these government run programs coupled with high admin costs due to government wages. If this is the case it is better for the people to keep the money and use it on the services and goods specific to their needs. The ideal of a less involvement from government is appealing to many.       

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

36 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

My guess is they'll say - Aga Khan, SNC, and ArriveCan (amongst others).

 

Oh shit, did I do their homework for them?  

The SNC lavalin shit is the most conservative thing ever. Purely polical posturing from Pierre 

[Warhippy]

10 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

If the removal of services is coupled with lower taxes, then its not as big of a deal as it means more money in peoples pockets to spend on what they want whether that be certain services or goods. If the government is launching well run cost effective services taking advantage of economies of scale for the public, its a huge win for everyone. But it doesn't seem like that is the case, as there are too many inefficiencies in these government run programs coupled with high admin costs due to government wages. If this is the case it is better for the people to keep the money and use it on the services and goods specific to their needs. The ideal of a less involvement from government is appealing to many.       

I'll ask the obvious.

 

Aside from the pittance of the .5% reduction in GST Harper pulled (which was tied to the cutting of seriously essential services which rendered it worthless) 

 

When has a politician ever lowered taxes or made life cheaper post 1981?

 

We live in a corptocracy where our essential crown corps that could have competed thus bringing general costs down have all been sold or privatized.

 

The removal of services will not result in lower taxes or a cheaper cost of living.  That's not how life works in our economic model

[112]

28 minutes ago, Bure_Pavel said:

If the removal of services is coupled with lower taxes, then its not as big of a deal as it means more money in peoples pockets to spend on what they want whether that be certain services or goods. If the government is launching well run cost effective services taking advantage of economies of scale for the public, its a huge win for everyone. But it doesn't seem like that is the case, as there are too many inefficiencies in these government run programs coupled with high admin costs due to government wages. If this is the case it is better for the people to keep the money and use it on the services and goods specific to their needs. The ideal of a less involvement from government is appealing to many.       

This line of thought only makes sense if we're operating under the idea that there isn't such a thing as poverty. And impoverished people are typically the most reliant on services.

[Ricky Ravioli]

3 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

not minimizing anything Ricky, just pointing it out. 

You aren't pointing out anything. You are stating an opinion. One that is wrong mind you

[King Heffy]

10 minutes ago, 112 said:

This line of thought only makes sense if we're operating under the idea that there isn't such a thing as poverty. And impoverished people are typically the most reliant on services.

Poilivre is like a reverse Robin Hood: stealing from the poor to give to the rich.

[Bure_Pavel]

17 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

I'll ask the obvious.

 

Aside from the pittance of the .5% reduction in GST Harper pulled (which was tied to the cutting of seriously essential services which rendered it worthless) 

 

When has a politician ever lowered taxes or made life cheaper post 1981?

 

We live in a corptocracy where our essential crown corps that could have competed thus bringing general costs down have all been sold or privatized.

 

The removal of services will not result in lower taxes or a cheaper cost of living.  That's not how life works in our economic model

At this point I will settle for status quo on taxes rates, income tax likely isn't going down but taxes on goods have been increasing like crazy including fuel which is basically just an increased tax on all goods and services. 

[bolt]

22 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Poilivre is like a reverse Robin Hood: stealing from the poor to give to the rich.

The working class have nothing left after being robbed by Trudeau.  For instance, giving $5 million per job to Stellantis and Honda.  Its OK though, Trudeau has admitted he doesn't think about monetary policy so it can be blamed more on ignorance and stupidity. I guess this explains the Liberals tanking in the polls.

Edited May 28 by bolt

[bolt]

1 hour ago, Bob Long said:

 

There's a weird cruelty to the cpc base now. 

Meanwhile the left Liberal base call the CPC in quote Nazis and that they have been infiltrated by the US far right Maga wing.  It's not advisable to throw stones from a glass house Bob.

Edited May 28 by bolt

[King Heffy]

8 minutes ago, bolt said:

Meanwhile the left Liberal base call the CPC in quote Nazis and that they have been infiltrated by the US far right Maga wing.  It's not advisable to throw stones from a glass house Bob.

A reminder that just because someone doesn't want to see the evil Poilivre wants to inflict on Canadians, doesn't mean they're a Liberal voter.  Personally, I consistently vote NDP although I'd certainly be willing to consider voting for anyone who will help prevent Poilivre from gaining a majority.

[bolt]

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/parks-canada-to-spend-12m-on-b-c-deer-cull-while-canadian-hunters-say-theyd-do-it-for-free

 

$10,000 per dead deer; they also used firearms that are banned in Canada.  I thought Trudeau said we didn't need automatic weapons to hunt?

 

More poor use of taxpayer money.  Better increase the theft of citizens to fund new Government programs.

 

9 years of corruption and incompetence and some wonder why the Liberals are on the verge of being destroyed in the next election.

Edited May 28 by bolt

[bishopshodan]

3 minutes ago, bolt said:

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/parks-canada-to-spend-12m-on-b-c-deer-cull-while-canadian-hunters-say-theyd-do-it-for-free

 

More poor use of taxpayer money.  Better increase the theft of citizens to fund new Government programs.

 

God damn Europeans f'ing with the Indigenous population again.

 

I know it was 100 years ago but way to introduce them to the island just as hunting game.

 

Anyway, yeah that s bit of dough  to fly in sharp shooters. That said, the private hunters I know, I wouldnt trust to mow my lawn properly. 

[Satchmo]

1 hour ago, bolt said:

Meanwhile the left Liberal base call the CPC in quote Nazis and that they have been infiltrated by the US far right Maga wing.  It's not advisable to throw stones from a glass house Bob.

Bolt may I remind you that there is only one guy in this forum that throws the word Nazi around.  Please don't paint us all with that brush.

 

Now as for conservatives adopting campaign and policy strategies from the US right, that's another story isn't it?  If my afternoon was free I wonder how many examples I could come up with on that front.

 

Edited May 28 by Satchmo

[the destroyer of worlds]

1 hour ago, Bure_Pavel said:

If the removal of services is coupled with lower taxes, then its not as big of a deal as it means more money in peoples pockets to spend on what they want whether that be certain services or goods. If the government is launching well run cost effective services taking advantage of economies of scale for the public, its a huge win for everyone. But it doesn't seem like that is the case, as there are too many inefficiencies in these government run programs coupled with high admin costs due to government wages. If this is the case it is better for the people to keep the money and use it on the services and goods specific to their needs. The ideal of a less involvement from government is appealing to many.       

Trickle down economics, which is basically what you are describing here, DOES NOT WORK.  It's been tried.  It's been tried on steroids (Brownback's Kansas for example).  The cuts is services are a big deal.  During Harpers government, Veterans offices were closed down, making it harder for veterans.  We had an incident here in PG shortly after the office here in town closed resulting in a dead vet by cop.  So it really IS a big deal.

 

EDIT:  I'll explain the Brownback example

 

Gov. Brownback slashed taxes with promises that this would create all kinds of economic opportunities because people would have more money in their pockets.  The cuts in taxes obviously reduced revenue to the government putting them in a bad deficit position.  Cuts to services then "had" to be done to get the self inflicted deficit under control.  Flash forward a few years.  Kansas' economy and other metrics lagged behind their neighbouring states.  States that are also GOP run, but didn't slash taxes like Kansas did.  The economic boom that Brownback promised did not happen.  It got so bad that the government that passed those tax cuts ultimately had to reinstate many of those cut taxes back.  It was a disaster.  Self inflicted.

Edited May 28 by the destroyer of worlds

[Optimist Prime]

2 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

There's a weird cruelty to the cpc base now. 

and a thuggishness from a part of their support base that seems to be encouraged and endorsed by Poilievre. 

Sort of like if one of the two presidential candidates was reachign out to Timothy McVeigh or the Unibomber as good people and bringing them and their supporters into the tent. Not a perfect analogy but close. It is a scary notion that the brownshirt ultra minority has a seat at the coalition of voters that will enable our next Prime Minister. At least it is concerning to me. And I am fully aware that 80% of CON supporters are just a step right of center, but the part I worry about is the pandering to the minority of extreme right wing views, both in attempt to quash the PPC and to cobble together a winning set of disparate voters to give Poilievre's version of the Reform Party absolute power. 

 

All he has ever done is tell us he wants the power, he is very short on telling us what he will do with the power, and that scares me. Undoing what the last ten years of government has done is not a platform.