Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Nice try but he’s not a random conservative political analyst, he’s a former Conservative Party official who served under Harper as executive director and chief of staff and worked with PP, and worked with the CPC as recently as 2022.

I mean, if we use the same standard you and the like apply to Carney, he’s as much of an insider as you can get!

So you are in agreeance that "Conservative Party official" should be qualified with the word former? As such whatever he has to say doesn't reflect official policy positions of the PP and the current CPC campaign?

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Random as in Harper's Chief of Staff. If you think he's no longer involved in the party I have some real estate to sell.

Trump never heard of Project 25 either.

He is still pissed the Rolls Royce Limo company charged his credit card for his limo rental for Carney! hahahahaha

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It's not "whataboutism" to note that attendees wore those buttons happily.

Source? In none of the reporting does it say that anyone actually wore the buttons but feel free to prove your point with images or other proof.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

So you are in agreeance that "Conservative Party official" should be qualified with the word former? As such whatever he has to say doesn't reflect official policy positions of the PP and the current CPC?.

So now you agree that “Conservative Party official” is correct with a qualifier, and that he’s not a “random political analyst” but someone who has actually worked for the party as recently as 2022 with direct ties to Harper and PP?

As such, we can’t confidently say his comments don’t reflect the official policy positions of “the PP” and the current CPC, as he clearly has very close ties.

Very concerning for you, I’m sure. Not knowing just how connected he is.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

So now you agree that “Conservative Party official” is correct with a qualifier, and that he’s not a “random political analyst” but someone who has actually worked for the party as recently as 2022 with direct ties to Harper and PP?

As such, we can’t confidently say his comments don’t reflect the official policy positions of “the PP” and the current CPC, as he clearly has very close ties.

Very concerning for you, I’m sure. Not knowing just how connected he is.

No, because "Conservative Party Official" would mean that he currently is involved in some capacity. Feel free to dig up that information and share his current role. He was formerly involved and now is opining as an analyst. The article only credits him with his former involvement and if he had any current stake in CPC affairs it would have been attributed to him in the introduction.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Firebot

I find it odd to focus on Brodie's speech who is not currently expected to play a role in government, instead of the Conservative version of the plan while Carney is also running on efficiencies and which are both included in the same article.

Probably for the same reasons people focus on what Steve Bannon and Project 2025 said vs. Trump and the GOP's "official" rhetoric on the same topics.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Cutting public service which has ballooned up significantly under Trudeau is absolutely not a bad thing and absolutely should be targeted...if done responsibility and not as a complete grift.

But it really hasn't expanded all that much when you compare it to the size of the economy. The non-defense final expenditure of goods/services (so federal expenses excluding transfers, subsidies, etc.) is a pretty good proxy for the cost of the running of the government and civil service. And in that regard, costs haven't moved up much at all:

2015: 3.4% of GDP
2024: 3.6% of GDP

And that 2024 number is still below basically any point in the last 50 or so years, other than a short stretch at the end of Harper's term and the beginning of Trudeau's.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by opendoor

But it really hasn't expanded all that much when you compare it to the size of the economy. The non-defense final expenditure of goods/services (so federal expenses excluding transfers, subsidies, etc.) is a pretty good proxy for the cost of the running of the government and civil service. And in that regard, costs haven't moved up much at all:

2015: 3.4% of GDP
2024: 3.6% of GDP

And that 2024 number is still below basically any point in the last 50 or so years, other than a short stretch at the end of Harper's term and the beginning of Trudeau's.

Partisan sycophant!

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by opendoor

But it really hasn't expanded all that much when you compare it to the size of the economy. The non-defense final expenditure of goods/services (so federal expenses excluding transfers, subsidies, etc.) is a pretty good proxy for the cost of the running of the government and civil service. And in that regard, costs haven't moved up much at all:

2015: 3.4% of GDP
2024: 3.6% of GDP

And that 2024 number is still below basically any point in the last 50 or so years, other than a short stretch at the end of Harper's term and the beginning of Trudeau's.

Originally Posted by rubecube

Partisan sycophant!

Feel free to do whatever interesting math you want but

In recent years, the federal government has been spending too much. Total spending has increased by around 9% per year on average over the past decade

Calculated as the compound annual growth rate from 2013-2014 to 2023-2024. Includes “direct program expenses” and therefore excludes major transfers to individuals, provinces, territories, and municipalities, public debt charges, and net actuarial losses

https://markcarney.ca/spend-less-invest-more

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

No, because "Conservative Party Official" would mean that he currently is involved in some capacity. Feel free to dig up that information and share his current role. He was formerly involved and now is opining as an analyst. The article only credits him with his former involvement and if he had any current stake in CPC affairs it would have been attributed to him in the introduction.

Well, he was an advisor to Scheer in 2020 and chair of the CPC election organizing committee in 2022 that resulted in PP being appointed leader. You think he quit being involved with the party after that?

Every talking head on these shows is sent there by a party.

Edit: The Hill Times says he is still a big player

https://www.hilltimes.com/story/2024...litics/433890/

[puffnstuff]

CTV News has learned tomorrow’s French-language leaders’ debate has been moved, to avoid overlapping with a critical Montreal Canadiens game.

The event will begin at 6 p.m. EDT Wednesday, two hours earlier than previously scheduled.

How very Canadian...or Canadiens I guess

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Feel free to do whatever interesting math you want but

https://markcarney.ca/spend-less-invest-more

You realize I'm not voting Liberal, nor am I in love with Carney as PM, right? The AI stuff in that platform makes my eyes roll.

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Well, he was an advisor to Scheer in 2020 and chair of the CPC election organizing committee in 2022 that resulted in PP being appointed leader. You think he quit being involved with the party after that?

Every talking head on these shows is sent there by a party.

Edit: The Hill Times says he is still a big player

https://www.hilltimes.com/story/2024...litics/433890/

He also spoke at the Canada Strong and Free annual conference. This is not an open mic night. Generally, like-minded people with influential ideas in favour of their party are the ones invited to speak.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Probably for the same reasons people focus on what Steve Bannon and Project 2025 said vs. Trump and the GOP's "official" rhetoric on the same topics.

People can certainly focus on speeches like Brodie's if their mind desires or their fears of Trump's ghost coming to power. People can also focus on the fiscal disaster that Trudeau caused and annul anything Carney campaigns on claiming Carney is Trudeau's puppet that will balloon public service much further.

Some folks prefer to view things objectively as they currently are. I take what both party / leaders put up as face value and measure based on this.

Cutting public service jobs and look for efficiencies is not something that would negatively impact my vote. On the surface both party policies are fairly close to each other on this where it wouldn't move me one way or another on this issue.

Non alarming issue for me as his speech doesn't represent what the party is campaigning on.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Well, he was an advisor to Scheer in 2020 and chair of the CPC election organizing committee in 2022 that resulted in PP being appointed leader. You think he quit being involved with the party after that?

Every talking head on these shows is sent there by a party.

Edit: The Hill Times says he is still a big player

https://www.hilltimes.com/story/2024...litics/433890/

Originally Posted by Titan2

He also spoke at the Canada Strong and Free annual conference. This is not an open mic night. Generally, like-minded people with influential ideas in favour of their party are the ones invited to speak.

Calgarygeologist:

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Some folks prefer to view things objectively as they currently are.

"I only view things objectively."

Source: Me

Also, if you're taking both party leaders at face value, and one is behaving like Trump, why is it considered "unobjective" to be concerned that said leader might continue to ape Trump once in power?

I take what both party / leaders put up as face value and measure based on this.

That's not called objectivity. It's naivety.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Cutting public service which has ballooned up significantly under Trudeau is absolutely not a bad thing and absolutely should be targeted...if done responsibility and not as a complete grift.

I find it odd to focus on Brodie's speech who is not currently expected to play a role in government, instead of the Conservative version of the plan while Carney is also running on efficiencies and which are both included in the same article.

But again, viewing issues objectively versus from a purely partisan sycophant viewpoint tends to pick those things out. Both Liberals and Conservatives are targeting public service jobs.

Surprised you didn't get alarmed about Carney's AI comments.

Brodie's speech was about what Pierre could do. Clearly Conservative minds are considering these things, and he's not saying this IS the plan, he's saying this is what they could do if motivated. And given Pierre's words over the past few years, I find it hard to comprehend that you can dismiss this as a strong possibility of being a plan they will follow, so discussing it is, well, what we are here for.


I'm not sure I've ever said anything about government being the right size, and it is reasonable to re-evaluate occasionally.


As to AI, I'm not sure what you mean. Just because I am critical of current version and point out obviously dangerous things about it, that doesn't mean I don't also believe it can be useful(I just tried to replace Locke with it in the accounting thread!). If the Liberals can find a way to make sue of it to reduce the cost of government, that seems....good?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Titan2

He also spoke at the Canada Strong and Free annual conference. This is not an open mic night. Generally, like-minded people with influential ideas in favour of their party are the ones invited to speak.

I mean, they had Gaal Saad, Danielle Smith, Kenney, Scott Moe, a couple Trump I secretaries, John Baird, Kory Teneckye, John Walsh...

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Firebot

People can certainly focus on speeches like Brodie's if their mind desires or their fears of Trump's ghost coming to power. People can also focus on the fiscal disaster that Trudeau caused and annul anything Carney campaigns on claiming Carney is Trudeau's puppet that will balloon public service much further.

Some folks prefer to view things objectively as they currently are. I take what both party / leaders put up as face value and measure based on this.

Cutting public service jobs and look for efficiencies is not something that would negatively impact my vote. On the surface both party policies are fairly close to each other on this where it wouldn't move me one way or another on this issue.

Non issue / non alarming for me.

Cuts are 100% necessary if we're going to take our own sovereignty, both economic & security, seriously given the new world order where the US is as much an adversary as friend. We need to free up tens of billions of dollars annually to push through critical economic infrastructure and expand our military capabilities.

[MrButtons]

We are so back https://globalnews.ca/news/11132975/...ouse-election/

“The president still maintains his position on Canada: the United States has been subsidizing Canada’s national defence, and he believes that Canadians would benefit greatly from becoming the 51st state of the United States of America.”