Thanks! It's nice when people actually have a good faith interest in what you post (even if only to debate) and don't just ignore the strongest arguments against them.
CBC is "arms length" (per
Wikipedia). They are state-funded but not state media. I don't think it's reasonable to look at CBC in a vacuum. You have to look at its role in the media landscape. It offers an alternative to Bell, Rogers, Corus (Shaw), and Quebecor, all of whom exert influence on the journalism their news channels produce to favour the ultra-wealthy.
Canada, again, does not exist in a vacuum. The WEF is a place where leaders can exchange ideas, learn best practices from each other, and coordinate mutually-beneficial projects. Of course, as a sovereign nation we should govern ourselves, and we do. But it is in our interest to seek agreements with partner nations for things like trade, as you wisely pointed out.
There are many things the government does do a better job buying than I do. Security for example, I'm not going to buy my own military. Healthcare. Education. Roads. Public transport. And those things need to be funded with taxes. As far as taxes go a tax on pollution is one of the best possible taxes we can have, especially since as an individual I get a rebate on my carbon tax expenditures. And, as I said, if we don't collect carbon tax ourselves, there's a good chance other countries will impose one on our exports and instead of us getting the revenue, they would.
Governments are different from individuals. They have the lowest borrowing costs, so have the most reason to borrow. If a government can borrow to prevent their citizens from having to borrow at higher interest, that's a net benefit (e.g. government borrowing to support CERB is far better for citizens than citizens racking up debt as individuals).
I do agree that debt has consequences. This is why I strongly opposed Harper using the surplus he was given to overstimulate the already hot economy he started with. He should've been paying down debt instead of cutting GST.
It's not a real concern, but a hypothetical to illustrate where things might go if the alt right gets catered to.
I will note that you didn't address my comments about the Ottawa COVID convoy or anti-trans policy.
And here you attempt to handwave away the very real concerns about the alt right and the policies that would come from appeasing them as "noise" and "infighting", but I don't accept that. Part of being the best leader is rejecting non-factual conspiracy nutjobs, putting the best interest of the nation before what's politically convenient (i.e. vaccination). Poillievre is not a good leader specifically because of how he interacts with the alt right. It is not noise, it is core to question of whether or not he is a good leader. (In fact, they are leading him, so he's not a leader at all in this context.) An anti-science, anti-vaxxer supporter in the PM chair means some Canadians who otherwise wouldn't will die. Evidence-based policy saves lives, and it's better policy. Poillievre chooses to chase the alt right's votes instead.