I suspect that this spending is related to deals with NDP to hang on to power. Seventy five percent of Canadians didn't vote for the NDP, and yet it's like we are being governed by them.
Also the influence of environmentalists like Gerald Butts, through his close relationship with the PM, is affecting our resource development, yet he has never run for office.
Where is are so called democracy?
Grab your pitchforks everyone! Kids in low income families are getting their teeth cleaned!
While we’re gathered flamesfever can list off all of the current resource development project proposals being roadblocked by Gerald Butts.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to iggy_oi For This Useful Post:
If they need propping up in an alliance then yes I would
I don’t want the conservatives and bloc creating a 50% alliance and pushing bloc policies through the rest of Canada as a governing government
But as long and the liberals and conservatives are the only real parties that matter AND we have a multi party system vote swinging parties hold a lot(too
Much in my Opinion ) power
A lot of the cons and bloc provincial vs federal ideologies align
Yep. The Bloc (and the Reform Party) were created out of the rubble of the PCs. It would be never be more than a tactical alliance of convenience, but I could see something similar to the informal alliance the current Liberals and NDP have.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
I suspect that this spending is related to deals with NDP to hang on to power. Seventy five percent of Canadians didn't vote for the NDP, and yet it's like we are being governed by them.
Also the influence of environmentalists like Gerald Butts, through his close relationship with the PM, is affecting our resource development, yet he has never run for office.
Where is are so called democracy?
These are some weird takes.
Coalition governments are pretty normal in every other democracy and allows more of a country's people to have a voice in government (the NDP/LIB is not a coalition, I understand that)
Gerald Butts was an advisor for years. Politicians have advisors. They help make policies that are then voted on by the people in elections.
You dont think Resource Development is heavily influencing the creation of policy through unelected lobbyists?
Where is the democracy indeed...
The Following User Says Thank You to Cappy For This Useful Post:
A lot of the cons and bloc provincial vs federal ideologies align
I should qualified my comment by saying that a Blanchet led bloc won't support the cons via a coalition. He has previously come out and said that he has no interest in supporting any coalition government and prefers minority governments.
I should qualified my comment by saying that a Blanchet led bloc won't support the cons via a coalition. He has previously come out and said that he has no interest in supporting any coalition government and prefers minority governments.
Of course he prefers minority governments . He can’t win a majority
Ideally he wants a con minority barely over the Liberals , and the bloc holding the sway vote for both the liberals and cons !
They’re getting slapped away when they advocate for responsible things like increasing the age of eligibility for OAS.
Quote:
A new book reveals that former finance minister Bill Morneau wanted to break a 2015 Liberal campaign promise to keep Old Age Security eligibility at 65, rather than raising it to 67, out of concern for the huge cost the policy would have on federal finances…
Robert Asselin, who played a lead role in drafting the Liberal platform and was then named Mr. Morneau’s budget director in the finance minister’s office, is quoted in a new book saying Mr. Morneau wanted to scrap the OAS promise.
“He saw the costs associated with this measure,” Mr. Asselin said. “He repeatedly urged him not to do it. Prime Minister Trudeau decided to go ahead anyway.”..
Neither the Liberals’ 2015 platform nor the 2016 budget put a price tag on the decision to scrap the OAS change. However, the Parliamentary Budget Officer issued a report in 2016 that said it would cost Ottawa an additional $11.2-billion a year once fully implemented.…
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by flamesfever
I suspect that this spending is related to deals with NDP to hang on to power. Seventy five percent of Canadians didn't vote for the NDP, and yet it's like we are being governed by them.
Also the influence of environmentalists like Gerald Butts, through his close relationship with the PM, is affecting our resource development, yet he has never run for office.
Where is are so called democracy?
Really? You suspect that eh?
How exactly did you come to this conclusion?
Was it the fact that Jagmeet Singh has been very vocal about the fact that NDP support is contingent on several things, one of them explicitly being a dental plan?
You must really have your ear to the ground to have picked up on that one. Like you clearly pay very close attention to politics in Canada to have pick up on something that is barely even a major point that has only been out in the open for AT MOST several months.
What other insights do you have?
Clearly someone so in tune with inside baseball like that can enlighten us more on things we might be missing.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Bring_Back_Shantz For This Useful Post:
Actually lower income people are vastly more likely to spend 100% of new money they receive than higher income people (who might top up RRSPs or similar savings). That isn't a value judgement, poor people have more unmet needs/wants so they're more likely to spend extra money.
So the government borrowing additional money and giving it to low income people is a very efficient way to convert capital to current spending, which is definitely inflationary. That doesn't make it the wrong thing to do necessarily, because poor people are more harmed by inflation than anyone else.
I agree they are going to spend it. But it also replaces debt and other things they were likely to take on anyways in a time of inflation.
A lot of the cons and bloc provincial vs federal ideologies align
The Bloc is a lot like the NDP in that they'll support anyone who can help get their stuff passed. In 2004 there was talk of a Conservative/NDP/Bloc 'alliance' to form government. They were talking of supporting a Liberal/NDP alliance in 2008.
Really? You suspect that eh?
How exactly did you come to this conclusion?
Was it the fact that Jagmeet Singh has been very vocal about the fact that NDP support is contingent on several things, one of them explicitly being a dental plan?
You must really have your ear to the ground to have picked up on that one. Like you clearly pay very close attention to politics in Canada to have pick up on something that is barely even a major point that has only been out in the open for AT MOST several months.
What other insights do you have?
Clearly someone so in tune with inside baseball like that can enlighten us more on things we might be missing.
I believe that holding on to power is simply the only reason, as the other reasons, for doing so, didn't make sense to me. With our underfunded healthcare situation, as pointed out at the recent meeting of our Premiers, why would our PM add additional financial stress to the system at this time with a dental plan. We are all aware of the terrible state of our healthcare in various parts of the country.
Do the kids teeth need fixing? Sure. Do the people troubled with rising inflation and interest rates need help? Sure. But I would think having an Emergency Department, and more qualified doctors and nurses in this Country would be higher in priority.
In view of our PMs past, with his tendency to buy votes with our money, his periodic unethical behavior, his background as a part of the Quebec elite, and his treatment of the West for political reasons, I have become very cynical.
IMO the handing out of additional sums of money to the masses will only tend to keep the economy stoked, which in turn will only increase interest rates and the pain that comes along with it. I believe a cooling off of the economy is essential to prevent things like labor unrest with wage acceleration, and a fixed and permanent inflationary psychology. Don't forget I experienced the 70s and 80s, and know how bad it can get.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
