Canadian Politics Thread

[Elias Pettersson]

41 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

National Post suggested Christy Clark 

 

Carney would be best but don't see it now.

 

Id probably go with Joly out of the current crop.

 

Melanie is alright.  Like you said, probably the best of what they have now. She would also attract the female vote. 

Edited October 12 by Elias Pettersson

[Elias Pettersson]

No wonder they are trying to get rid of Trudeau. The Liberals could be completely wiped out next election. 
 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

 

[Bob Long]

8 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Melanie is alright.  Like you said, probably the best of what they have now. She would also attract the female vote. 

 

She would cause problems for PP and his base, the ugliness would really come out and probably drive away a lot of support. Look what their kin in the US is doing, id expect similar things up here.

 

[Elias Pettersson]

55 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

She would cause problems for PP and his base, the ugliness would really come out and probably drive away a lot of support. Look what their kin in the US is doing, id expect similar things up here.

 

She will need to separate herself from Trudeau as she is a cabinet minister. If she can do that then I think she has a real shot.  She’s a lawyer, speaks French fluently and is easy on the eyes. Also in a good age bracket to be around for a long time. 
 

They need to do this now though. Can’t wait until next year. The Conservatives have too much momentum. 

Edited Saturday at 03:57 PM by Elias Pettersson

[Bob Long]

Just now, Elias Pettersson said:

She will need to separate herself from Trudeau as she is a cabinet minister. If she can do that then I think she had a real shot.  She’s a lawyer, speaks French fluently and is easy on the eyes. Also in a good age bracket to be around for a long time. 
 

 

I'm not sure how big a deal 'separation' is for her tbh. She's got the looks, the language, a good portfolio, the right age, to get peoples attention. "not Justin" is likely enough. 

 

Really couldn't get much more of a stark difference from PP. 

 

Just now, Elias Pettersson said:

They need to do this now though. Can’t wait until next year.

 

they do. But I've been saying this for 2 years 

 

Just now, Elias Pettersson said:

The Conservatives have too much momentum. 

 

I believe it has a lot of softness to it. There are a lot of people simply frustrated with Justin, who actually want to evaluate someone else. 

 

And I do think having a female candidate to run against would hurt the cons, so much insecure boy anger in the con movement right now.

 

[Boudrias]

1 minute ago, Bob Long said:

 

I'm not sure how big a deal 'separation' is for her tbh. She's got the looks, the language, a good portfolio, the right age, to get peoples attention. "not Justin" is likely enough. 

 

Really couldn't get much more of a stark difference from PP. 

 

 

they do. But I've been saying this for 2 years 

 

 

I believe it has a lot of softness to it. There are a lot of people simply frustrated with Justin, who actually want to evaluate someone else. 

 

And I do think having a female candidate to run against would hurt the cons, so much insecure boy anger in the con movement right now.

 

Not worth commenting on. I believe Ford ran against a women. The same type of comments were being made about him. He won and was re-elected. 

How about we consider the platforms rather than looks or cheap shots. If the platform does not stand up against the opposition then don't vote for the candidate. 

[Bob Long]

4 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Not worth commenting on. I believe Ford ran against a women. The same type of comments were being made about him. He won and was re-elected. 

How about we consider the platforms rather than looks or cheap shots. If the platform does not stand up against the opposition then don't vote for the candidate. 

 

Have you looked at what the US right is saying about Harris? you can't tell me that misogyny isn't a big part of the tack against Harris. Same thing will happen in some right wing circles up here too, book it. The CPC has taken many cues from the US right and some in the party will follow suit. 

 

[Satchmo]

3 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Not worth commenting on. I believe Ford ran against a women. The same type of comments were being made about him. He won and was re-elected. 

How about we consider the platforms rather than looks or cheap shots. If the platform does not stand up against the opposition then don't vote for the candidate. 

Sage advise.  It kind of ignores the way a large chunk of voters actually think and act though.  Many of us just seem to vote for the best haircut.

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

Just now, Satchmo said:

Sage advise.  It kind of ignores the way a large chunk of voters actually think and act though.  Many of us just seem to vote for the best haircut.

 

Or on a tribal basis instead of policies - despite the fact that the very policies of the people they vote for will be to their own detriment.

[Bob Long]

@Boudrias

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harassment-women-public-life-journalists-politicians-1.6564376

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

28 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I'm not sure how big a deal 'separation' is for her tbh. She's got the looks, the language, a good portfolio, the right age, to get peoples attention. "not Justin" is likely enough. 

 

Really couldn't get much more of a stark difference from PP. 

 

 

they do. But I've been saying this for 2 years 

 

 

I believe it has a lot of softness to it. There are a lot of people simply frustrated with Justin, who actually want to evaluate someone else. 

 

And I do think having a female candidate to run against would hurt the cons, so much insecure boy anger in the con movement right now.

 

“Not Justin” won’t be enough for Joly. She is a cabinet minister. She needs to run on her own platform. She also needs to sign off on getting rid of Trudeau. So that it makes her look like she is distancing herself from him. Even Paul Martin eventually turned on Chrétien. If Joly can do all these things and bring in a fiscally conservative platform like Chrétien and Martin, then she has a real shot IMO. She will need to turn the Liberal party back to a centrist party that is fiscally conservative. If she can do that she has my vote 100% and many others like me. 

Edited Saturday at 04:31 PM by Elias Pettersson

[Elias Pettersson]

I thought Trudeau was a man of the people?  What happened?

 

[bishopshodan]

20 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I thought Trudeau was a man of the people?

 

I thought that was your unhinged friend Jag?

Isn't that why he uses the name Singh?

 

But to your post, do we need to 'tax the rich? wheres your link to the story? whats the solution to this inequality?

[Bob Long]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

“Not Justin” won’t be enough for Joly. She is a cabinet minister. She needs to run on her own platform. She also needs to sign off on getting rid of Trudeau. So that it makes her look like she is distancing herself from him. Even Paul Martin eventually turned on Chrétien. If Joly can do all these things and bring in a fiscally conservative platform like Chrétien and Martin, then she has a real shot IMO. She will need to turn the Liberal party back to a centrist party that is fiscally conservative. If she can do that she has my vote 100% and many others like me. 

 

Dunno... Maybe ten years ago I'd agree on the distance thing but I don't think she's attached to Trudeau like Freeland is eg. 

 

I do think Carney will provide the financial road map, he doesn't need to be elected to do that.

[Elias Pettersson]

13 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

 

I thought that was your unhinged friend Jag?

Isn't that why he uses the name Singh?

 

But to your post, do we need to 'tax the rich? wheres your link to the story? whats the solution to this inequality?

 

Mr. Jagmeet Jimmy Singh Dhaliwal might need to change his name again once he goes to work with Dana...   

 

Income inequality in Canada rises to the highest level ever recorded: Statistics Canada | CBC News

 

Income inequality in Canada rises to the highest level ever recorded: Statistics Canada

 

Widening income gap driven by investment returns for top 20 per cent of Canadian earners

 

The top 20 per cent of Canadian earners increased their share of disposable income in the second quarter of 2024, largely due to investment gains. (Paige Taylor White/The Canadian Press)

 

Income inequality in Canada has hit the highest level ever recorded as wealth becomes increasingly concentrated in fewer hands, says Canada's statistics agency.

 

The gap in the share of disposable income between the richest two-fifths of Canadians and the bottom two-fifths grew to 47 percentage points in the second quarter of 2024, Statistics Canada reported Thursday.

 

That's the widest gap recorded since 1999, when Statistics Canada first started collecting such data.

 

The gap was driven by the top 20 per cent of income earners, who saw the largest increase in their share of disposable income, the report said. That increase was driven largely by investment gains, which the statistics agency attributed to high interest rates.

 

"While higher interest rates can lead to increased borrowing costs for households, they can also lead to higher yields on saving and investment accounts," the report said.

 

"Lower income households are more likely to have a limited capacity to take advantage of these higher returns, as on average they have fewer resources available for saving and investment."

 

While those in the lowest 20 per cent saw a slight rise in their share of disposable income due to wage increases, the middle 60 per cent of Canadians saw a decrease in their share.

 

The Statistics Canada report said that in the second quarter, the top 20 per cent of Canadians held more than two-thirds of the country's wealth, averaging $3.4 million per household. By comparison, the bottom 40 per cent of Canadians accounted for only 2.8 per cent of Canada's wealth.

 

Asked about rising income inequality in Canada, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said the Liberal government has been focused on bringing forward policies — such as childcare and dental care programs — to help middle class and lower-income Canadians.

 

"We are working very, very hard to lean against this tendency in the global economy towards more inequality," she told reporters at a press conference on Thursday.

 

"We're leaning against it with very specific policies designed to support middle class Canadians and people working hard to join the middle class."

 

But Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre blamed Liberal policies for the widening wealth and income gaps.

 

"Today, Stats Canada reported that the gap between rich and poor is at its highest level in recorded history, after NDP-Liberal money printing inflated the assets of the super rich while inflating the cost of living for everyone else," he told reporters at a press conference.

[4petesake]

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Mr. Jagmeet Jimmy Singh Dhaliwal might need to change his name again once he goes to work with Dana...   

 

Income inequality in Canada rises to the highest level ever recorded: Statistics Canada | CBC News

 

Income inequality in Canada rises to the highest level ever recorded: Statistics Canada

 

Widening income gap driven by investment returns for top 20 per cent of Canadian earners

 

The top 20 per cent of Canadian earners increased their share of disposable income in the second quarter of 2024, largely due to investment gains. (Paige Taylor White/The Canadian Press)

 

Income inequality in Canada has hit the highest level ever recorded as wealth becomes increasingly concentrated in fewer hands, says Canada's statistics agency.

 

The gap in the share of disposable income between the richest two-fifths of Canadians and the bottom two-fifths grew to 47 percentage points in the second quarter of 2024, Statistics Canada reported Thursday.

 

That's the widest gap recorded since 1999, when Statistics Canada first started collecting such data.

 

The gap was driven by the top 20 per cent of income earners, who saw the largest increase in their share of disposable income, the report said. That increase was driven largely by investment gains, which the statistics agency attributed to high interest rates.

 

"While higher interest rates can lead to increased borrowing costs for households, they can also lead to higher yields on saving and investment accounts," the report said.

 

"Lower income households are more likely to have a limited capacity to take advantage of these higher returns, as on average they have fewer resources available for saving and investment."

 

While those in the lowest 20 per cent saw a slight rise in their share of disposable income due to wage increases, the middle 60 per cent of Canadians saw a decrease in their share.

 

The Statistics Canada report said that in the second quarter, the top 20 per cent of Canadians held more than two-thirds of the country's wealth, averaging $3.4 million per household. By comparison, the bottom 40 per cent of Canadians accounted for only 2.8 per cent of Canada's wealth.

 

Asked about rising income inequality in Canada, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said the Liberal government has been focused on bringing forward policies — such as childcare and dental care programs — to help middle class and lower-income Canadians.

 

"We are working very, very hard to lean against this tendency in the global economy towards more inequality," she told reporters at a press conference on Thursday.

 

"We're leaning against it with very specific policies designed to support middle class Canadians and people working hard to join the middle class."

 

But Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre blamed Liberal policies for the widening wealth and income gaps.

 

"Today, Stats Canada reported that the gap between rich and poor is at its highest level in recorded history, after NDP-Liberal money printing inflated the assets of the super rich while inflating the cost of living for everyone else," he told reporters at a press conference.

 

Welcome to this side of the table, Petey!
 

Many here have been banging on the income inequality drum for a long time  but any time the government takes even the smallest measure they get accused here of “wealth redistribution” or called socialists. So if you don’t want higher capital gains tax or higher corporate tax or some other means of getting the wealthiest Canadians to pay their fair share and you want a balanced budget, what’s PP’s answer? The economy is obviously working very well for the top 20% right?

 

Of course we know that it’ll be to cut social programs for the very people that need them most coupled with the sell off of Canadian assets. And who’ll benefit most from this? The wealthiest 20% is the correct answer!

[Boudrias]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

“Not Justin” won’t be enough for Joly. She is a cabinet minister. She needs to run on her own platform. She also needs to sign off on getting rid of Trudeau. So that it makes her look like she is distancing herself from him. Even Paul Martin eventually turned on Chrétien. If Joly can do all these things and bring in a fiscally conservative platform like Chrétien and Martin, then she has a real shot IMO. She will need to turn the Liberal party back to a centrist party that is fiscally conservative. If she can do that she has my vote 100% and many others like me. 

Apparently Jolie was willing to sacrifice Israel for the sake of 7000 voting Palestinians in her riding. I would hope the Liberals would reach into the business community to find a new leader. They are incrediably weak on the finance side. 

[the destroyer of worlds]

6 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

Welcome to this side of the table, Petey!
 

Many here have been banging on the income inequality drum for a long time  but any time the government takes even the smallest measure they get accused here of “wealth redistribution” or called socialists. So if you don’t want higher capital gains tax or higher corporate tax or some other means of getting the wealthiest Canadians to pay their fair share and you want a balanced budget, what’s PP’s answer? The economy is obviously working very well for the top 20% right?

 

Of course we know that it’ll be to cut social programs for the very people that need them most coupled with the sell off of Canadian assets. And who’ll benefit most from this? The wealthiest 20% is the correct answer!

Na, PP will just tax cut and slash social programs his way to magically fixing the problem.  LOL

 

I mean, it has worked every other time CONs followed the voodoo.

[Elias Pettersson]

22 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Apparently Jolie was willing to sacrifice Israel for the sake of 7000 voting Palestinians in her riding. I would hope the Liberals would reach into the business community to find a new leader. They are incrediably weak on the finance side. 

 

I'm not sure on her stance on Israel.  Are you saying she is anti Israel?

[NewbieCanuckFan]

2 hours ago, Boudrias said:

Apparently Jolie was willing to sacrifice Israel for the sake of 7000 voting They are incrediably weak on the finance side.  

Even weaker at the top.  Junior, like most politicians, don't know when the make a graceful exit. 

Edited Saturday at 08:50 PM by NewbieCanuckFan

[The Arrogant Worms]

[Boudrias]

5 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

 

How was my post altered? I did not write the last 2 sentences. 

[Elias Pettersson]

26 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

Welcome to this side of the table, Petey!
 

Many here have been banging on the income inequality drum for a long time  but any time the government takes even the smallest measure they get accused here of “wealth redistribution” or called socialists. So if you don’t want higher capital gains tax or higher corporate tax or some other means of getting the wealthiest Canadians to pay their fair share and you want a balanced budget, what’s PP’s answer? The economy is obviously working very well for the top 20% right?

 

Of course we know that it’ll be to cut social programs for the very people that need them most coupled with the sell off of Canadian assets. And who’ll benefit most from this? The wealthiest 20% is the correct answer!

 

Rich people took advantage of high inflation, which means high interest rates, which means making more money on their money.  They also took advantage of the housing boom.  They also took advantage of a slowing economy by moving their money around and waiting for the market to flip.  They aren't interested however in increased taxation and wealth redistribution.

 

Didn't Chretien cut social services to balance the budget?  Hard choices need to be made.  I know some on here think you can just print money with no repercussions, but that is just not true at all.  The young generation will be the ones who suffer from that, and that is why alot of generation z is voting Conservative...

[Elias Pettersson]

2 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

How was my post altered? I did not write the last 2 sentences. 

 

He altered and reposted it without doing the normal cross outs.  Even in this thread, we have fake news...