Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Isn’t that your entire argument for why the NDP should stop supporting the Liberals in the first place?

No

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

3/4 of the national debt is from Harper and Mulroney.

I'm sure you'd love to share your logic and calculation behind this but as a starting point when Harper left office in late 2015 the national debt was around $650M. Today it is around $1.5B. Somehow the national debt ballooned under Trudeau but it is mostly Harper's fault? The significant escalation was 2000 onwards where is grew from around $900M to $1.5B. Obviously we know why that happened, Covid, but how are you going to try to attribute much of that to the previous actions of Harper's government (because you have to tie the covid spending/debt back to Harper if you want to back up your 75% claim)?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

The polling numbers don’t agree with what you are saying. You can think whatever you want, but the numbers don’t back up what you are thinking.

Most polls have them around 18-19% right now and in the last election they got less than 18% of the popular vote so I’m not sure what you’re basing your position on.

I was wondering if you would say that.

It’s always nice when people confirm things for you so that you don’t have to keep wondering.

You honestly think the CPC should make a deal with the NDP right now? Since the NDP have latched onto the Liberal titanic, that doesn’t sound like a smart move to me.

Well since a lot of people are suggesting that the NDP are doing Canadians a disservice by not supporting forcing an early election right now, would it not be fair to say that the CPC are as well if they are not trying everything in their power to make one happen too?

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

3/4 of the national debt is from Harper and Mulroney.

Hmmmm. The graphs I saw had it coming from trudeau 1 and 2. Do you have one that is different?

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I'm sure you'd love to share your logic and calculation behind this but as a starting point when Harper left office in late 2015 the national debt was around $650M. Today it is around $1.5B. Somehow the national debt ballooned under Trudeau but it is mostly Harper's fault? The significant escalation was 2000 onwards where is grew from around $900M to $1.5B. Obviously we know why that happened, Covid, but how are you going to try to attribute much of that to the previous actions of Harper's government (because you have to tie the covid spending/debt back to Harper if you want to back up your 75% claim)?

Of that original $650 billion Trudeau 1.0 was responsible for a big chunk.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Most polls have them around 18-19% right now and in the last election they got less than 18% of the popular vote so I’m not sure what you’re basing your position on.



It’s always nice when people confirm things for you so that you don’t have to keep wondering.



Well since a lot of people are suggesting that the NDP are doing Canadians a disservice by not supporting forcing an early election right now, would it not be fair to say that the CPC are as well if they are not trying everything in their power to make one happen too?

Well, I guess we will agree to disagree. I still don’t think a Liberal leadership change helps the NDP. I also don’t think the CPC should team up with the NDP so the NDP stop supporting the current government.
Thanks for the discussion.

[curves2000]

The lack of political follow up from all parties and leaders with this Trump nonsense of Canada being the 51st State is shocking and pathetic.

The fact that our PM has not addressed this with any sort of statement or media conference, on top of everything that has been happening this week is even more so. It highlights just how little respect he actually garners.

Trump is not easy to deal with but you can craft a carefully worded statement highlighting the close ties with America but re-enforcing what everybody knows, that Canada is an independent country.

I see no other serious country or serious leader that would tolerate such garbage without saying a peep. Can you imagine if a Middle East country said that about Israel or vice versa? The UK saying that to France? Turkey saying that to Greece. New Zeeland to Australia. Japan to China and more?

This is passed the point of a joke and needs to be addressed by the leader of our country today. The Russian's made a veiled threat to a UK based newspaper and the foreign affairs minister responded forcefully. What is our leadership actually doing? I don't think people are appreciating just how far down, sad and pathetic Canada has become. Literally no other serious nation would be putting up with this crap without so much of a statement! Heck for purposes of diplomatic cooling down, fire off a tweet with something funny and witty while distancing yourself form this crap.

Just brutal

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Okay I read your post summary. I address each item.

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.

Originally Posted by Goriders

CBC funding. Media should be arms length from government. Their job is to hold government accountable. Government funded media isn’t going to do that. It’s a conflict of interest that doesn’t benefit the country. Grants for content is different. But paying salaries isn’t a good idea in my mind.

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.

Originally Posted by Goriders

WEF attendance. Don’t see what value this really adds to Canada. Policy making should happen within our borders. It shouldn’t be molded externally. Maybe influenced by global trends such as trade strategies. But Canadians should be forming their own policies to benefit Canadians.

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.

Originally Posted by Goriders

Carbon tax. Why would you have any problems with paying less taxes. This is one I don’t understand. Do you think the government does a better job spending you money than you do. It’s becoming pretty obvious that they don’t.

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.

Originally Posted by Goriders

Spending under control. Once again. It’s fairly obvious that governments are one of the least fiscally responsible entities. Why do they not have to follow general guidelines of budgeting restraint like every other canadian? What happens to regular people if they blow through their budgets and generate a ton of debt. How is it any different. The debt they are generating has to get paid back by the citizens at some point. There are consequences to debt.

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.

Originally Posted by Goriders

Native concerns. I didn’t quite understand what you were getting at with this one.

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.

Originally Posted by Goriders

Alt right comments. I think eventually the left vs right compartmentalization needs to subside and voters need to vote for the best leaders. Canada is very light on true leaders in it’s levels of government right now. Municipally, provincially and especially federally. We are all paying a price for that now. The left vs right infighting is just noise. It doesn’t add any value.

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.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by SebC

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.

Sorry I missed a few of your items.

Can you list your main concerns around what you describe as alt right conspiracies. I hear that a lot but would like to put some context to it.

I can comment on your list.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Well, I guess we will agree to disagree. I still don’t think a Liberal leadership change helps the NDP. I also don’t think the CPC should team up with the NDP so the NDP stop supporting the current government.
Thanks for the discussion.

Fair enough. I think parties should try to work together wherever they can.

I wonder why you don’t feel they should try to work together.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Wormius

You’re proving my point. The NDP gain nothing from triggering an early election. Especially if the CPC are going to play that way. If a new LPC leader emerges and things play out well over the next few months, it’s favourable for everyone (except the CPC).

How is a stronger Liberal party favourable to the NDP?
It seems the NDP play has been to let the Liberals keep sinking as that could make space for them (which makes sense).
Now we're turning that 180 and saying building the Liberals up will also be better for them?

The only argument that makes sense is a strong Liberal party will enact policies better for NDP voters, but that would come at the expense of them actually getting votes.
So they'd become an altruistic martyr for the cause.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Sorry I missed a few of your items.

Can you list your main concerns around what you describe as alt right conspiracies. I hear that a lot but would like to put some context to it.

I can comment on your list.

This is starting to feel like you're just trying to overwhelm me with sealioning.

Anyways, here are some of the conspiracy theories for which Poillievre's actions and policies just happen to be exactly what you would do if you believe them.

WEF conspiracy theories (ties in with COVID conspiracy theories)

COVID vaccine misinformation

More vaccine misinformation

Climate change denial

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Fair enough. I think parties should try to work together wherever they can.

I wonder why you don’t feel they should try to work together.

I am not against parties working together. I don’t think it’s in the best interest of the CPC to cut a deal with the NDP now. They aren’t even the elected government.

After the election, you see where the seat count is and then you make deals as required (if required). I wouldn’t jump the gun and make any deals before I was actually power. It would probably just piss off the CPC’s potential voters.

[SebC]

Singh backing Trudeau (for a price) has actually made him a rather effective NDP leader (e.g. getting Pharmacare and dental started). He's got more of a legacy than Mulcair or Layton and he did it with less. Unfortunate that he's unlikely to get rewarded for it electorally, so the lesson for future NDP leaders will be "don't do that".

[Ped]

Originally Posted by SebC

Singh backing Trudeau (for a price) has actually made him a rather effective NDP leader (e.g. getting Pharmacare and dental started). He's got more of a legacy than Mulcair or Layton and he did it with less. Unfortunate that he's unlikely to get rewarded for it electorally, so the lesson for future NDP leaders will be "don't do that".

That woudl depend if their goal is to actually do better for Canadians, or to say stuff that sounds good so they can get re-elected and can just milk the government teat for as long as they can.


Certainly most politicians choose the latter.

[curves2000]

Originally Posted by SebC

Singh backing Trudeau (for a price) has actually made him a rather effective NDP leader (e.g. getting Pharmacare and dental started). He's got more of a legacy than Mulcair or Layton and he did it with less. Unfortunate that he's unlikely to get rewarded for it electorally, so the lesson for future NDP leaders will be "don't do that".

You are allowed your personal opinion but the amount of people who think that Singh has been a really good NDP leader can probably fit into a room. He never got credit for some of things like you said but the level of propping up Trudeau, the tone deafness on policies and the complete loss of working class/middle class voter to the CPC is shocking.

The NDP used to be a force butt now they are just a shadow of their former selves

[Sylvanfan]

Well if Populist ideals are gaining on both sides of the Spectrum a Liberal party that is more Central might help the NDP as some traditional Liberal supporters might move to a NDP party that swings harder to the left to counter the more Populist Conservative party.

Populist type politicians on both sides seem to be gaining support in many Western democratic states. Germany and France both had more Centrist type governments not be able to keep power due to strong opposition on both sides.

[Nancy]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

3/4 of the national debt is from Harper and Mulroney.

Harper gets a pass because of the 2008 financial crisis. No excuses for Mulroney, though.

Sure do miss Paul Martin.



image sharing sites

EDIT: Source is Fraser Institute, but it is consistent with the data I see on Stats Can.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/site...ation-2022.pdf

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

I am not against parties working together. I don’t think it’s in the best interest of the CPC to cut a deal with the NDP now. They aren’t even the elected government.

After the election, you see where the seat count is and then you make deals as required (if required). I wouldn’t jump the gun and make any deals before I was actually power. It would probably just piss off the CPC’s potential voters.

Fair enough but the thing is the only reason the liberals and NDP are in power at this time is because they made a deal, the CPC could do the same and then the liberals would be out of the picture much sooner. To be fair you are right that it could potentially rub some CPC supporters the wrong way but I’d be willing to bet that it’d be minor at worst and probably wouldn’t result in many of those voters jumping ship to vote liberal.

Personally I just can’t see a scenario where enough CPC supporters are enraged enough to ditch the party if they make a deal to continue offering things like some form of pharmacare and dental care to low income Canadians.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by curves2000

The lack of political follow up from all parties and leaders with this Trump nonsense of Canada being the 51st State is shocking and pathetic.

The fact that our PM has not addressed this with any sort of statement or media conference, on top of everything that has been happening this week is even more so. It highlights just how little respect he actually garners.

Trump is not easy to deal with but you can craft a carefully worded statement highlighting the close ties with America but re-enforcing what everybody knows, that Canada is an independent country.

I see no other serious country or serious leader that would tolerate such garbage without saying a peep. Can you imagine if a Middle East country said that about Israel or vice versa? The UK saying that to France? Turkey saying that to Greece. New Zeeland to Australia. Japan to China and more?

This is passed the point of a joke and needs to be addressed by the leader of our country today. The Russian's made a veiled threat to a UK based newspaper and the foreign affairs minister responded forcefully. What is our leadership actually doing? I don't think people are appreciating just how far down, sad and pathetic Canada has become. Literally no other serious nation would be putting up with this crap without so much of a statement! Heck for purposes of diplomatic cooling down, fire off a tweet with something funny and witty while distancing yourself form this crap.

Just brutal

I don’t know about that. I’m really not sure what use there is addressing it either and I think Trump is joking and quite frankly who cares if he isn’t?