Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Ped]

Sure, but maybe you have to start with a longer term, and then gradually whittle it down.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I am not opposed to the move but this also has the chance to be abused. I have relatives overseas who are going to be ecstatic when I mention this is a possibility if they qualify, which I think they would? My uncle came to Canada with my father in the 70's, both got citizenship. My father stayed, my uncle left 10 years later and had children overseas. I would assume that this would make my cousins potentially Canadian now?

As children of a naturalized Canadian citizen, your cousins would have always been eligible for Canadian citizenship if they wanted it, so this changes nothing for them.

The only difference now is, if they want to pass on their Canadian citizenship to their kids, they need to live in Canada for 3+ years before their kids are born. Whereas under the old rule, it would have been impossible to pass on their Canadian citizenship.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

This thinking essentially gives politicians a 16 year term depending how the election cycle works out. That opens the door to allow for a lot of career politicians.

Opens the door suggests there are people who aren't becoming career politicians because there aren't term limits, which seems nonsensical.



There are ~70 MPs that would be at or past the limit this cycle (including Trudeau and Poilievre at 16 and 20 years, respectively).

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

This thinking essentially gives politicians a 16 year term depending how the election cycle works out. That opens the door to allow for a lot of career politicians.

They currently have no limits. What’s your solution that you think they would actually go along with?

I think it’s highly unlikely that the current politicians are going to agree to legislate something like 2 term limits that would see a lot of them done at the start of the next election cycle so you have to come up with a proposal that would be viable. It’s not a be all end all solution but it gets the ball rolling in the right direction and would IMO make it easier to push to move from potential 16 year terms to 12 year terms. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

They currently have no limits. What’s your solution that you think they would actually go along with?

I think it’s highly unlikely that the current politicians are going to agree to legislate something like 2 term limits that would see a lot of them done at the start of the next election cycle so you have to come up with a proposal that would be viable. It’s not a be all end all solution but it gets the ball rolling in the right direction and would IMO make it easier to push to move from potential 16 year terms to 12 year terms. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good.

I don't expect that parliamentarians would be supportive of your suggested term limit to begin with. I don't expect them to be willing to adopt any limits.

I don't see your proposal as being particularly helpful in making our political representatives any better and if something was to be implemented it should closer to 8 (can't run again in or after their 8th year because our elections can be pretty irregular.)

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I don't expect that parliamentarians would be supportive of your suggested term limit to begin with. I don't expect them to be willing to adopt any limits.

I don't see your proposal as being particularly helpful in making our political representatives any better and if something was to be implemented it should closer to 8 (can't run again in or after their 8th year because our elections can be pretty irregular.)

Let me get this straight.

You don’t like my suggestion because even though it’s a step in the right direction it doesn’t completely solve the problem and you don’t think elected officials would ever go for it anyways. And then you put forward a different suggestion that would get the end result you want right away by going way further than my suggestion which would lead to the elected officials being even less likely to go for it as a result.

With all due respect it seems as though you’re just complaining for the sake of complaining while offering nothing of value to the discussion.

[Harry Lime]

Term limits are a problem in a lot of countries. US it's almost a cancer.

My favorite solution was always to make term limits at each level of government you serve. That way you can be a career politician but you couldn't camp at one level. If you jumped early into an MP position, for example, and serve 8 years, then your options are to try for the PM seat, or take your experience to the provincial or municipal level. The best candidates would have a 32 year lifespan in politics, with the exceptional acting as mayor, premier or PM and extending that longer. It would also bring some extremely qualified people to lower levels of government, and increase the value of those positions.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

Term limits are a problem in a lot of countries. US it's almost a cancer.

My favorite solution was always to make term limits at each level of government you serve. That way you can be a career politician but you couldn't camp at one level. If you jumped early into an MP position, for example, and serve 8 years, then your options are to try for the PM seat, or take your experience to the provincial or municipal level. The best candidates would have a 32 year lifespan in politics, with the exceptional acting as mayor, premier or PM and extending that longer. It would also bring some extremely qualified people to lower levels of government, and increase the value of those positions.

I've thought of something like this myself.

If you want to be a career politician you cant just languish as a local incumbent, you've got to hustle. Keep working and keep being responsible.

If you're an amazing President and the other options suck out loud? You have the option to stay.

Short term limits for lower positions, and longer limits for higher ones.

[Harry Lime]

I thinkt that a straight 8 across the board might be more effective, just because of horrible people like Pelosi and Graham in the states , camping forever at the higher level. Consider the leader position as it's own level, and you max out at 16 years for the best of the best.

But yeah, something like this seems natural.

Originally Posted by Locke

I've thought of something like this myself.

If you want to be a career politician you cant just languish as a local incumbent, you've got to hustle. Keep working and keep being responsible.

If you're an amazing President and the other options suck out loud? You have the option to stay.

Short term limits for lower positions, and longer limits for higher ones.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Let me get this straight.

You don’t like my suggestion because even though it’s a step in the right direction it doesn’t completely solve the problem and you don’t think elected officials would ever go for it anyways. And then you put forward a different suggestion that would get the end result you want right away by going way further than my suggestion which would lead to the elected officials being even less likely to go for it as a result.

With all due respect it seems as though you’re just complaining for the sake of complaining while offering nothing of value to the discussion.

Holy #### I'm trying to have a discussion on something that you proposed and I'm expressing my thoughts and suggestions on the matter. Are you incapable of understanding what a discussion entails and immediately taking it as an attack and trying to shut it down? It's incredible that somehow only you add value to the discussion. What a POS.

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It’s impressive that you always seem to know someone abusing every single system you weigh in on.

Well it's not hard to see where abuses in the systems can be, sometimes it's just right in front of us. The level of corruption in Canada is epic, a lot of Canadians just don't see it.

There are hospitals in the Vancouver area that have 25+% foreign resident births, that kid is Canadian and when structured properly can collect the child tax credit until 18, even if they don't live in Canada.

If you recall for years and years when the the prices of homes in BC was going bonkers, people were talking about foreign buyers. It was deemed racist to even discuss. After a few years it became a provincial and federal issue, then all of a sudden the taxes start getting levied.

When I was in banking, there were a few memos reminding staff of client confidentiality. Plenty of clients with $75k watches, expensive handbags and cars and millions in the bank cashing government chq's.

It's not hard to see abuse if people have their eyes open. People pull these style of scams where the demand is.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Holy #### I'm trying to have a discussion on something that you proposed and I'm expressing my thoughts and suggestions on the matter. Are you incapable of understanding what a discussion entails and immediately taking it as an attack and trying to shut it down? It's incredible that somehow only you add value to the discussion. What a POS.

Lol

Cry me a river pal.

You came out of nowhere to criticize a suggestion I made responding to another poster and offered up a different suggestion that based on your own assessment of the viability of my suggestion being accepted by elected officials could only be assessed by any reasonable person as being completely unpractical or at the very least far less viable than my suggestion. Now you’re trying to gaslight me into believing that as a result of me calling that out as completely unproductive I’m somehow of the opinion that no one but myself can add value to the discussion?

If you don’t like my suggestion that would somewhat address the fact that there currently are no term limits because you don’t think politicians would go for it maybe you should try suggesting something that would have some impact on the issue that they would be more likely to go for, not one that they would be less likely to.

I’m not taking what you wrote as an attack on me, I’m taking it for what it is. Unproductive nonsense.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Lol

Cry me a river pal.

You came out of nowhere to criticize a suggestion I made responding to another poster and offered up a different suggestion that based on your own assessment of the viability of my suggestion being accepted by elected officials could only be assessed by any reasonable person as being completely unpractical or at the very least far less viable than my suggestion. Now you’re trying to gaslight me into believing that as a result of me calling that out as completely unproductive I’m somehow of the opinion that no one but myself can add value to the discussion?

If you don’t like my suggestion that would somewhat address the fact that there currently are no term limits because you don’t think politicians would go for it maybe you should try suggesting something that would have some impact on the issue that they would be more likely to go for, not one that they would be less likely to.

I’m not taking what you wrote as an attack on me, I’m taking it for what it is. Unproductive nonsense.

Came out of nowhere? That is the whole purpose of community forums. Someone posts something, other people read it and post replies and discuss a topic. You posted something that you claimed would definitely reduce the number of crappy career politicians and I disagree because your proposal allows for those crappy politicians to potentially hold their position for 16 or so years which doesn't solve any of the issues related to crappy career politicians.

I'm sorry that you see disagreement as such an affront to discussion but you won't always get buy in to your ideas. I subsequently offered my opinion on what could be done and you dismissed it as offering no value. You're throwing stones from a glass house.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Came out of nowhere? That is the whole purpose of community forums. Someone posts something, other people read it and post replies and discuss a topic. You posted something that you claimed would definitely reduce the number of crappy career politicians and I disagree because your proposal allows for those crappy politicians to potentially hold their position for 16 or so years which doesn't solve any of the issues related to crappy career politicians.

We literally currently have politicians who have served for longer than 16 years. For you to suggest that having a limit of 16 years wouldn’t have any affect is both illogical and ignorant of the facts. It would literally not allow those career politicians to be there.

I'm sorry that you see disagreement as such an affront to discussion but you won't always get buy in to your ideas. I subsequently offered my opinion on what could be done and you dismissed it as offering no value. You're throwing stones from a glass house.

Doubling down on the gaslighting I see. Good grief.

You said there was no way politicians would agree to 16 years and then suggested that we should go with 8 years anyways. There’s no way you could possibly believe that there is a better chance of them agreeing to 8 years if you don’t think they’d agree to 16 years so it’s a pointless suggestion in the context that you brought it up in.

I don’t disagree with you that 16 years might be less than ideal, and I never said that 8 years would be bad if we could ever get there but both of those things are completely irrelevant. My suggestion was a road map to getting term limits implemented in the first place and a potential number that might work to get us there, your counter suggestion was what you want currently non-existent term limits to be with no ideas on how to get them implemented in some shape or form in the first place.

If you can’t understand how that doesn’t add anything productive in terms of coming up with ways to actually get term limits legislated in some form or another, I’m not sure what to tell you.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

We literally currently have politicians who have served for longer than 16 years. For you to suggest that having a limit of 16 years wouldn’t have any affect is both illogical and ignorant of the facts. It would literally not allow those career politicians to be there.



Doubling down on the gaslighting I see. Good grief.

You said there was no way politicians would agree to 16 years and then suggested that we should go with 8 years anyways. There’s no way you could possibly believe that there is a better chance of them agreeing to 8 years if you don’t think they’d agree to 16 years so it’s a pointless suggestion in the context that you brought it up in.

I don’t disagree with you that 16 years might be less than ideal, and I never said that 8 years would be bad if we could ever get there but both of those things are completely irrelevant. My suggestion was a road map to getting term limits implemented in the first place and a potential number that might work to get us there, your counter suggestion was what you want currently non-existent term limits to be with no ideas on how to get them implemented in some shape or form in the first place.

If you can’t understand how that doesn’t add anything productive in terms of coming up with ways to actually get term limits legislated in some form or another, I’m not sure what to tell you.

I never said it wouldn't have any affect though, that is just your interpretation of my comment. I said it wouldn't be particularly helpful because the potential maximum term is too long a timeframe which doesn't do much about bad career politicians.

Why, how and what reasoning do you have to support your idea that any term limit could be implemented in Canada for MPs? Has any representative floated anything? The PCs tried to implement term limits for Senate as a starting point but that was shut down.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by curves2000

Well it's not hard to see where abuses in the systems can be, sometimes it's just right in front of us. The level of corruption in Canada is epic, a lot of Canadians just don't see it.

But you do. Every time. Because it’s always right in front of you. It’s literally always someone you personally know.

I’ve never seen someone with a personal anecdote that directly supports his outlook on something for every single issue.

A lot more Canadians must see it than you thinking considering it’s always so blatant and common place.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by curves2000

When I was in banking, there were a few memos reminding staff of client confidentiality. Plenty of clients with $75k watches, expensive handbags and cars and millions in the bank cashing government chq's.

Wealthy people deposit cheques from the gov't, too? I'll be damned

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I never said it wouldn't have any affect though, that is just your interpretation of my comment. I said it wouldn't be particularly helpful because the potential maximum term is too long a timeframe which doesn't do much about bad career politicians.

You’re really getting in semantics here. It’s already been pointed out to you that 16 year term limits would eliminate the ability for roughly 20% of current MPs to run again in the next election. I guess if you want to hold the opinion that that would not be particularly helpful or that 20% of MPs not being able to seek re-election in a single election cycle is not significant then that’s fair enough. I’m not sure the majority of people would agree with you and I don’t think that anyone would argue that it’s less helpful than the status quo. That’s just my opinion though.

Why, how and what reasoning do you have to support your idea that any term limit could be implemented in Canada for MPs? Has any representative floated anything? The PCs tried to implement term limits for Senate as a starting point but that was shut down.

Since you’ve opted to use the fact that one attempt to impose term limits for senators failed to materialize as your implied argument for why it probably can’t happen for MPs, is the SCC saying that it can be done for senators good enough reasoning for you?

https://www.constitutionalstudies.ca...s/?print=print

At least seven provinces representing at least half of Canada’s population, also known as the “7/50 amending procedure”, must agree to any reform dealing with the selection or length of senatorial terms;

[Cappy]

https://www.readtheline.ca/p/andrew-...m_medium=email

Granted, not all courtships are fairy book romances, but this gave me the ick

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by Cappy

https://www.readtheline.ca/p/andrew-...m_medium=email

Granted, not all courtships are fairy book romances, but this gave me the ick

Trudeau is divorced and Harper shakes his kids hand when he drops him off for school.

Just give me someone competent, the bar is so low