Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[1991 Canadian]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Anything is possible. But capitalism has either directly or indirectly provided you with almost everything you enjoy about your life and continues to do so.

I agree. No system has done more to add value to the human experience and lift people out of poverty than capitalism. But it needs to be saved from itself.

We are in an era where consolidation and lack of competition is killing this historical uplifting benefit.

In certain industries, particularly low barrier to entry industries, we are still benefiting from capitalistic innovation and competition. Local restaurants are my favourite example. We’ve never had better options for food in Calgary.

Now start thinking of any industry with more complexity and startup costs. Is there is single one that has bucked this consolidation and degraded benefit trend?

I work in power. We are down to 3 companies that sell gas turbines in Canada. GE(USA), Siemens(Germany) and Mitsubishi (Japan). Guess what this does to prices? I literally have no recourse to buy elsewhere. And these companies know it.

So when I hear right wing political parties talk about lowering taxes and red tape regulations as a solution I roll my eyes. Taxes and regulations could be literally zero, and I would still not be starting “1991 Canadians gas turbine company”.

Capitalism with competition is the best system out there. That’s not what we have. I don’t see the solution coming from any side of the aisle, but we’ve got to do something different.

[Azure]

Isn't it amusing and sad watching our pathetic government now try to actually do something about the tariff threat?

Example.

Liquor sales. Ford wants LCBO to remove all American liquor from the shelves if the tariffs go through. LCBO is one of the biggest buyers of alcohol in the world. Obviously that would devastate many American producers.

My question is, why have we prioritized for so many years American producers, and not let Canadian companies compete more? Specifically why has our government worked for so many years to restrict inter provincial trade on alcohol sales? Up till 2019 it was a CRIME to transport beer across provincial lines. Many provinces still don't allow direct to consumer sales across Canada, etc, etc.

And now these folks in charge want to tell us they will change all that? What a bloody joke.

[Fuzz]

You can get Canadian wine in any Canadian liquor store. The barriers are for tax collection purposes, primarily. We don't export much because our production capacity is low. We buy cheaper American wine because transport costs are lower, and they produce more, and because we WERE ####ing trade partners, before they all lost their goddamned minds.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

I agree. No system has done more to add value to the human experience and lift people out of poverty than capitalism. But it needs to be saved from itself.

We are in an era where consolidation and lack of competition is killing this historical uplifting benefit.

In certain industries, particularly low barrier to entry industries, we are still benefiting from capitalistic innovation and competition. Local restaurants are my favourite example. We’ve never had better options for food in Calgary.

Now start thinking of any industry with more complexity and startup costs. Is there is single one that has bucked this consolidation and degraded benefit trend?

I work in power. We are down to 3 companies that sell gas turbines in Canada. GE(USA), Siemens(Germany) and Mitsubishi (Japan). Guess what this does to prices? I literally have no recourse to buy elsewhere. And these companies know it.

So when I hear right wing political parties talk about lowering taxes and red tape regulations as a solution I roll my eyes. Taxes and regulations could be literally zero, and I would still not be starting “1991 Canadians gas turbine company”.

Capitalism with competition is the best system out there. That’s not what we have. I don’t see the solution coming from any side of the aisle, but we’ve got to do something different.

Great points. As you point out free markets aren't zero maintenance things.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Azure

Isn't it amusing and sad watching our pathetic government now try to actually do something about the tariff threat?

Example.

Liquor sales. Ford wants LCBO to remove all American liquor from the shelves if the tariffs go through. LCBO is one of the biggest buyers of alcohol in the world. Obviously that would devastate many American producers.

My question is, why have we prioritized for so many years American producers, and not let Canadian companies compete more? Specifically why has our government worked for so many years to restrict inter provincial trade on alcohol sales? Up till 2019 it was a CRIME to transport beer across provincial lines. Many provinces still don't allow direct to consumer sales across Canada, etc, etc.

And now these folks in charge want to tell us they will change all that? What a bloody joke.

American products are in demand because they produce good products. Canadian whiskey is mostly rack liquor due to the lack of laws around production and blending. Canada still does pretty well on the export of hard liquor exports, it something like top 15.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Azure

Isn't it amusing and sad watching our pathetic government now try to actually do something about the tariff threat?

Example.

Liquor sales. Ford wants LCBO to remove all American liquor from the shelves if the tariffs go through. LCBO is one of the biggest buyers of alcohol in the world. Obviously that would devastate many American producers.

My question is, why have we prioritized for so many years American producers, and not let Canadian companies compete more? Specifically why has our government worked for so many years to restrict inter provincial trade on alcohol sales? Up till 2019 it was a CRIME to transport beer across provincial lines. Many provinces still don't allow direct to consumer sales across Canada, etc, etc.

And now these folks in charge want to tell us they will change all that? What a bloody joke.

It was not a crime to transport beer across provincial lines. In 2019 the Liberals removed the requirement for liquor to move through a provincial liquor authority but prior there was simply limits to the amount you could bring over.

You can blame individual provinces if you want but the federal government has little to nothing to do with whatever issue you have here. And, of course, it’s not as simple as you make it out to be.

The Alberta NDP changed the rules which made bringing in alcohol from elsewhere more difficult and encouraged homegrown production, which resulted in a noticeable boom in Alberta-based breweries and distillers. Thanks to the exact policies you’re complaining about set by the Alberta NDP, Albertans would hardly notice American producers being removed.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Azure

Isn't it amusing and sad watching our pathetic government now try to actually do something about the tariff threat?

Example.

Liquor sales. Ford wants LCBO to remove all American liquor from the shelves if the tariffs go through. LCBO is one of the biggest buyers of alcohol in the world. Obviously that would devastate many American producers.

My question is, why have we prioritized for so many years American producers, and not let Canadian companies compete more? Specifically why has our government worked for so many years to restrict inter provincial trade on alcohol sales? Up till 2019 it was a CRIME to transport beer across provincial lines. Many provinces still don't allow direct to consumer sales across Canada, etc, etc.

And now these folks in charge want to tell us they will change all that? What a bloody joke.

This is a test for Canada and an opportunity as Trump holds up a mirror to our dysfunction.

It's largely up to Ontario and Quebec to be the deciders on whether all provinces can participate in Confederation equally. I don't give it much of a chance as Canadian voters would have to unlearn their previous delusional and infantile habits.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by Slava

Yeah, I will concede that I shouldn’t have called him Skippy. I also don’t like it when people do that and try to have a conversation, so that’s on me.

As far as the Liberals and whether they should continue defending a policy that everyone hates, it’s amusing. I understand that the entire CPC campaign was “axe the tax” and “we hate Trudeau”, so with both of those things gone there isn’t much to campaign on. But that’s politics.

The CPC honestly doesn't have to do much anymore in terms of convincing, the Liberals are doing it for them. Making this about the CPC and losing their campaign slogans, this has never been about the CPC.

Let's put it in another way. Who gets a bump in polls if Freeland is bashing her party leader and the carbon tax on national TV?

What good does Freeland do when she says “axe the tax” and “we hate Trudeau” today but stood with him for 9 years? It's part of her own record. People will just go to the person who said the same things 2 years ago, instead of the person that was defending the carbon tax and Trudeau just 2 months ago.

Remove the party names for a second and political affiliation (as this seems to cloud some folks). Instead you have two parties, one that is the challenger saying the current government is inept and they will change things, and one that is the incumbent saying the same things the challenger is. If all else is equal, who would you go for? The party that is being called inept by both parties?

CPC just have to replay older clips of Freeland and Carney talking against themselves.

[Locke]

I feel compelled to mention.

Regardless of how I feel about Trudeau, I think he's an unqualified idiot who is barely literate and mostly a moron.

However...I'm relatively certain that he isn't a Nazi nor Nazi-Adjacent.

So he's got that going for him. Which is nice.

Whats not so nice however is that it appears that Canada is now...effectively...Nazi Adjacent.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Firebot

The CPC honestly doesn't have to do much anymore in terms of convincing, the Liberals are doing it for them. Making this about the CPC and losing their campaign slogans, this has never been about the CPC.

Let's put it in another way. Who gets a bump in polls if Freeland is bashing her party leader and the carbon tax on national TV?

What good does Freeland do when she says “axe the tax” and “we hate Trudeau” today but stood with him for 9 years? It's part of her own record. People will just go to the person who said the same things 2 years ago, instead of the person that was defending the carbon tax and Trudeau just 2 months ago.

Remove the party names for a second and political affiliation (as this seems to cloud some folks). Instead you have two parties, one that is the challenger saying the current government is inept and they will change things, and one that is the incumbent saying the same things the challenger is. If all else is equal, who would you go for? The party that is being called inept by both parties?

CPC just have to replay older clips of Freeland and Carney talking against themselves.

Except that Poilievre himself is not popular - much less popular than his party - and many people find him off-putting despite agreeing with many of his positions. If they can get the same positions from someone the feel more comfortable with they way swing back to the liberals. The polls have narrowed already.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

We are in an era where consolidation and lack of competition is killing this historical uplifting benefit.

Feels like the world needs some monopoly busting especially in the tech sector. I was reading an interesting parallel between the conglomerate boom in the 60s and the current state of the large tech companies. Traditional conglomerates fell out fashion and are still unpopular on wallstreet except when it comes to tech companies. Remains to be seen if the story will play out differently this time around but conglomerates were a huge drag in the 60s and 70s.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Feels like the world needs some monopoly busting especially in the tech sector. I was reading an interesting parallel between the conglomerate boom in the 60s and the current state of the large tech companies. Traditional conglomerates fell out fashion and are still unpopular on wallstreet except when it comes to tech companies. Remains to be seen if the story will play out differently this time around but conglomerates were a huge drag in the 60s and 70s.

Where is there a monopoly in the tech sector?

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Except that Poilievre himself is not popular - much less popular than his party - and many people find him off-putting despite agreeing with many of his positions. If they can get the same positions from someone the feel more comfortable with they way swing back to the liberals. The polls have narrowed already.

I don't think the policy differences we talk about here are significant relative to the problems within Confederation. If neither party is willing to move the needle on the problems with democratic representation in Canada then it's likely none of the other things will matter that much. Trump revealed a lot with his tariff threat.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Where is there a monopoly in the tech sector?

Amazon, google, and meta are all currently in anti-trust investigations and lawsuits. Amazon is looking more and more like conglomerates of the 60s.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

I don't think the policy differences we talk about here are significant relative to the problems within Confederation. If neither party is willing to move the needle on the problems with democratic representation in Canada then it's likely none of the other things will matter that much. Trump revealed a lot with his tariff threat.

You keep referencing these "problems within Confederation" (from the perspective of the wealthiest, most prosperous member of Confederation) but I don't think I understand what exactly you're referring to. Could you please try to articulate them? (Sincere request - not trying to be a dick).

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Amazon, google, and meta are all currently in anti-trust investigations and lawsuits. Amazon is looking more and more like conglomerates of the 60s.

None of those are monopolies. Not even close.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

None of those are monopolies. Not even close.

Pardon?

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Makarov

You keep referencing these "problems within Confederation" (from the perspective of the wealthiest, most prosperous member of Confederation) but I don't think I understand what exactly you're referring to. Could you please try to articulate them? (Sincere request - not trying to be a dick).

I get accused (rightly) of word salad. So I'll try to avoid.

Confederation is setup to hand enormous powers to a PM with a majority. Canada's population is concentrated in Quebec and Ontario. So to get essentially unfettered power over the whole country you just need some sort of coalition between Quebec and Ontario.

This has defined Canadian policy from the start with predictable results. Trudeau being the peak. Most previous prime ministers at least understood that they needed to pretend this wasn't the case.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

I get accused (rightly) of word salad. So I'll try to avoid.

Confederation is setup to hand enormous powers to a PM with a majority. Canada's population is concentrated in Quebec and Ontario. So to get essentially unfettered power over the whole country you just need some sort of coalition between Quebec and Ontario.

This has defined Canadian policy from the start with predictable results. Trudeau being the peak. Most previous prime ministers at least understood that they needed to pretend this wasn't the case.

Thank you for this.

Well, I acknowledge that asking whether the prime minister wields too much power or influence is a legitimate question, I definitely disagree that a PM with a majority has "essentially unfettered power over the whole country".

I also disagree that achieving "some sort of coalition between Quebec and Ontario" is something easily achieved. In any event, there are plenty of other coalition opportunities out there, including, for example, the western provinces-GTA suburbs coalition that elected Stephen Harper's government for over a decade.

Lastly, even accepting your premise as true (which I obviously don't), I don't really see great evidence that Prime Ministers have wielded this power to plunder Alberta for the benefit of people in Ontario/Quebec. Alberta, not Ontario or Quebec, is the wealthiest, most prosperous province. Obviously, some legislation or policies will, from time to time, benefit some provinces more than others, but Alberta generally seems to be doing just fine under Confederation (and all of its rules, etc). What am I missing?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Thank you for this.

Well, I acknowledge that asking whether the prime minister wields too much power or influence is a legitimate question, I definitely disagree that a PM with a majority has "essentially unfettered power over the whole country".

I also disagree that achieving "some sort of coalition between Quebec and Ontario" is something easily achieved. In any event, there are plenty of other coalition opportunities out there, including, for example, the western provinces-GTA suburbs coalition that elected Stephen Harper's government for over a decade.

Lastly, even accepting your premise as true (which I obviously don't), I don't really see great evidence that Prime Ministers have wielded this power to plunder Alberta for the benefit of people in Ontario/Quebec. Alberta, not Ontario or Quebec, is the wealthiest, most prosperous province. Obviously, some legislation or policies will, from time to time, benefit some provinces more than others, but Alberta generally seems to be doing just fine under Confederation (and all of its rules, etc). What am I missing?

blind hatred?