Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by belsarius

Nature and CBC? Those are bootlicker studies.

Show me the contrary ones.

[belsarius]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Show me the contrary ones.

Sorry, I wasn't being serious, just mocking the continued use of "bootlicker". I 100% agree with the studies!

[2ArmBands]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I suggest you actually look at what the studies have shown about the effects of the carbon tax. It's done more than any other effort to reduce emissions and has little to no effect on the economy.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-48512-w

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/car...tudy-1.7408728

The article is an assessment of inflation not overall economic impact. These are different things.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Azure

Do you always post false information?

Carney is not going to 'axe the tax.' He has said he'll just reinvent it.

Housing is built locally, can be funded federally, and there is already evidence of federal funds actually doing that. Pay attention.

Crime is a federal issue, given the federal legislation that deals with many aspects around how crime is persecuted.

The issue with crime today isn’t that sentencing isn’t tough enough. The problem (aside from the root causes of social breakdown the that CPC have no solution to) is that there’s a chronic shortfall of court capacity. We have more people behind bars in this country awaiting trial than we do serving sentences. That’s why petty criminals get bounced back onto the street. It isn’t due to judges being soft-hearted liberals - it’s because the court backlog is so long (up to 18 months) that it’s the most expedient way to handle the overload.

And since most criminal cases are tried in provincial court, it’s provincial resources that are needed to fix that.

But I don’t hear Poilievre (or Danielle Smith) pledging increased resources for provincial courts. Because that would cost real money, and building more court houses and hiring more lawyers, judges, and court clerks doesn’t look good as a headline in the Calgary Sun. Instead they’ll do things that are cheap, performative, and ineffective - like increasing mandatory sentences - in order to play to their base.

[woob]

Wrong Thread.

[WideReceiver]

I don’t follow federal politics as closely as provincial politics, which I don’t follow as closely as municipal politics. However I hate PP more than Trudeau. PP terrifies me. Carney does worry me but he seems to be the best of the bad so he’s my preference. I guess.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by WideReceiver

I don’t follow federal politics as closely as provincial politics, which I don’t follow as closely as municipal politics. However I hate PP more than Trudeau. PP terrifies me. Carney does worry me but he seems to be the best of the bad so he’s my preference. I guess.

Honestly, I'm pretty much right with you on the assessment, I might be a little more optimistic about Carney than most. On principle I am supportive of the carbon tax, and this most of the negatives people cite are make believe efforts to find a popular critique of someone they would like to see defeated electorally, but I'm also very aware of the reality that their efforts have been successful and a tactical retreat from the policy is probably required, and a new strategy will need to be implemented later. And I have followed Carney waxing philosophical for some time even prior to the last 6 or 7 years of rumblings that he would eventually seek the PMship.

All of that said I think the best result in the election would be a very weak conservative minority. I think if the Liberals win a Minority and are not able to effectively govern, then PP will hold on and come back stronger than ever, and Canada will sink further than we think is possible.

Something like;
CPC 135
LP 130
73 seats spread out where no 1 party alone can push the cons up to 170

I also think PP would be a useful tool to put in front of Trump and tell Drumpf that he is in charge and he is Maple Maga, it would probably put an end to a lot of this yo-yo crap.

[Looch City]

Use PP as bait basically? Lol I love it haha.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The issue with crime today isn’t that sentencing isn’t tough enough. The problem (aside from the root causes of social breakdown the that CPC have no solution to) is that there’s a chronic shortfall of court capacity. We have more people behind bars in this country awaiting trial than we do serving sentences. That’s why petty criminals get bounced back onto the street. It isn’t due to judges being soft-hearted liberals - it’s because the court backlog is so long (up to 18 months) that it’s the most expedient way to handle the overload.

And since most criminal cases are tried in provincial court, it’s provincial resources that are needed to fix that.

But I don’t hear Poilievre (or Danielle Smith) pledging increased resources for provincial courts. Because that would cost real money, and building more court houses and hiring more lawyers, judges, and court clerks doesn’t look good as a headline in the Calgary Sun. Instead they’ll do things that are cheap, performative, and ineffective - like increasing mandatory sentences - in order to play to their base.

You also get time served at a higher rate; since you’re essentially being held against your rights until you’re convicted…. So you’re out quicker there too (due to it taking so long).

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Looch City

Use PP as bait basically? Lol I love it haha.

Yep, give PP no real control of policy and money because his minority is so weak, but the title for 1.5 years until the Americans can put some checks on Trump at the mid terms. It's probably the utopian outcome of the sick twisted reality we live in, the past 9 years would dictate that we don't have that kind of quantum luck on the timelines.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by #-3

Yep, give PP no real control of policy and money because his minority is so weak, but the title for 1.5 years until the Americans can put some checks on Trump at the mid terms. It's probably the utopian outcome of the sick twisted reality we live in, the past 9 years would dictate that we don't have that kind of quantum luck on the timelines.

I don't even want that little weasel getting the title. Imagine having to call someone like him "Honourable" for the rest of our lifetimes.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't even want that little weasel getting the title. Imagine having to call someone like him "Honourable" for the rest of our lifetimes.

I'm not the Queen, I don't have to call him anything I don't want to.

[2ArmBands]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I don't even want that little weasel getting the title. Imagine having to call someone like him "Honourable" for the rest of our lifetimes.

If we can do it for the Honourable Balckface we can do it for anyone!

[Ped]

Originally Posted by 2ArmBands

If we can do it for the Honourable Balckface we can do it for anyone!

What a profoundly self-destructive and idiotic reason to do something stupid.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Azure

Cliff making #### up to try and justify his anti PP stance. Its laughable and pathetic at best. But what else is new.

Right? Totally ridiculous. As if someone would need to justify an anti-PP stance.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

Cliff making #### up to try and justify his anti PP stance. Its laughable and pathetic at best. But what else is new.

Have you tried calling him a bootlicker yet?

[troutman]

The Trudeau blackface thing is so tired. Yes, it was ignorant (and he apologized) but no way Justin really believes whites are a superior race. PP on the other hand plays with actual racists (no apologies).

[MrButtons]

Originally Posted by troutman

The Trudeau blackface thing is so tired. Yes, it was ignorant (and he apologized) but no way Justin really believes whites are a superior race. PP on the other hand plays with actual racists (no apologies).

I also like to believe that people are more than their worst or bad moments. It's how they respond, recognize it and move forward that matters more. It feels like we always look for politicians to be perfect people, but thats unrealistic. We need to understand that as people, they too make mistakes and its their response and understanding that matters. Not to say for PM we shouldnt have higher standards than a junior financial analyst, but you know what I mean.

[Bonded]

https://www.axios.com/2025/03/05/tru...x-newtab-en-us

[Fuzz]

My economic corridor plan:

The TC mainline, the only in Canada pipeline we have runs past Timmins(near Kapuskasing on this map).



This is the "Polar Express" rail line, or Northlander. Cochrane is near Timmins.



So, the plan would be to build a big ass port at Moosonee(or nearby appropriate location, it's been studied)that exports oil, LNG, and they have rail so may as well plan for goods. Grain maybe keep at Churchill? If we need more export capacity, sure add that.

Leave the mainline as is, but have the option to divert exports if capacity is there. Add a second gas and oil line along the same route to Moosonee. It's only about 250km. Continue oil further east/south maybe? a 1 million barrel oil pipeline could feed Ontario with half of it, and export the other half. They could also build the oil tank farm at Timmins or whatever, so they wouldn't need huge storage further north.

I think this avoids a lot of the more challenging terrain in Manitoba, and provides better access to Ontario. If we want energy independence AND export options, this makes more sense than Churchill. We also make Ontario the big finance partner here, which has a lot more resources than Manitoba. Obviously a huge amount of money, but we'll just make Quebec pay for it.