I scanned it, and it's full of the usual childishness that we've all come to expect. Things like "stop funding drug dens" and "stop the Liberal gun grab" make it hard to take this seriously. They're running about a $100bn deficit over the next four years, if you can believe that $10bn in consultants' savings per year. There is no plan to balance the budget, so I'm curious to see what the CPC supporters think of that.
ho boy. I heard a lot of CPC backers harking on the deficit spending announced in Carney's budget. Even many LPC backers saying it was a bad idea to release one (akin to Notley's in last Prov election).
ho boy. I heard a lot of CPC backers harking on the deficit spending announced in Carney's budget. Even many LPC backers saying it was a bad idea to release one (akin to Notley's in last Prov election).
CPCs response doesnt seem to be great.
One thing i'm hating about Carney is that he is way too nice to the deplorables. It's so damn frustrating letting PP lie about everything without much pushback.
__________________ Peter12 "I'm no Trump fan but he is smarter than most if not everyone in this thread. ”
I scanned it, and it's full of the usual childishness that we've all come to expect. Things like "stop funding drug dens" and "stop the Liberal gun grab" make it hard to take this seriously. They're running about a $100bn deficit over the next four years, if you can believe that $10bn in consultants' savings per year. There is no plan to balance the budget, so I'm curious to see what the CPC supporters think of that.
Revenue gain from repealing the No More Pipelines Law Bill C-69 235 242 250 257
Revenue gain from repealing the Clean Electricity Regulations 0 34 34 34
Revenue gain from repealing the EV Mandate 0 2,370 3,710 5,140
Revenue gain from axing the Carbon Tax in Full 0 2,300 2,700 3,200
Revenue gain from eliminating Clean Fuel Regulations 0 553 632 790
Revenue gain from scrapping the Emissions Cap on Oil and Gas 0 810 1,640 2,500
What the hell is this?
This is the 2021 CPC Costed platform plan for comparison, much more normal under O'Toole.
Oh man, this ad (that doesn't feature PP at all, must have realized how unpopular he is) is so cringe. Poor Sarah's doing soo poorly, her white boomer dad had to buy her a house! Better vote for PP!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Torture For This Useful Post:
I don't like when an organization of radical billionaires brags about "penetrating the cabinets" of the Canadian government with their "young global leaders". Tell me what you know of the WEF?
I watched the video and I'll be honest, I don't really understand what the issue is with what Schwab said. Admittedly, I don't know that much about what the WEF does, but from doing a bit of reading my understanding is that they're trying to create global cooperation on common issues, and the young global leaders is trying to provide a foundation of education and training on how to perform responsible governance. So, I'm still confused about what the problem is here.
Is there something specific that you have an issue with?
Also, I had asked about how the WEF contrasts to the IDU. Seems to me that the IDU is a conservative version of the WEF. Stephen Harper is the chair of the IDU, so do you have a similar problem with the IDU "penetrating" the Canadian cabinet?
__________________
Who is in charge of this product and why haven't they been fired yet?
Revenue gain from repealing the No More Pipelines Law Bill C-69 235 242 250 257
Revenue gain from repealing the Clean Electricity Regulations 0 34 34 34
Revenue gain from repealing the EV Mandate 0 2,370 3,710 5,140
Revenue gain from axing the Carbon Tax in Full 0 2,300 2,700 3,200
Revenue gain from eliminating Clean Fuel Regulations 0 553 632 790
Revenue gain from scrapping the Emissions Cap on Oil and Gas 0 810 1,640 2,500
What the hell is this?
This is the 2021 CPC Costed platform plan for comparison, much more normal under O'Toole.
It's just weird because Conservatives are most definitely and traditionally very capable of providing proper and serious costed platforms
It has to be a leadership issue. People have been ringing the alarm bells for months that PPs plans don’t make sense and he doesn’t have any clue on how to manage the economy, and this is clear evidence of that.
People hand wringing over the economy under the Liberals should be absolutely terrified of the disaster they’re eager to vote in.
I prefer Poillievre's math. Carney said he was going to cut 1% to the lowest tax bracket at a cost of $22B.
However, Poillievre has managed to find a way to make the cut 2.5x bigger for that bracket, but only costing $8B more.
Carney is way too cautious with his numbers. We need a leader who can be bolder and more optimistic about how much things are going to cost us, for a change.
Revenue gain from repealing the No More Pipelines Law Bill C-69 235 242 250 257
Revenue gain from repealing the Clean Electricity Regulations 0 34 34 34
Revenue gain from repealing the EV Mandate 0 2,370 3,710 5,140
Revenue gain from axing the Carbon Tax in Full 0 2,300 2,700 3,200
Revenue gain from eliminating Clean Fuel Regulations 0 553 632 790
Revenue gain from scrapping the Emissions Cap on Oil and Gas 0 810 1,640 2,500
What the hell is this?
This is the 2021 CPC Costed platform plan for comparison, much more normal under O'Toole.
It's just weird because Conservatives are most definitely and traditionally very capable of providing proper and serious costed platforms
Next thing you know PP's slogans will be making revenue for the Gov't too. Budgets balance themselves when you rely on fairy tale numbers. In fact, axing taxes is not going to reduce revenues, it's going to make us money!
Bring it home: 10B
Spike the hike: 5B
Axe the tax: 7.5B
For a change: 100B
All of them are ridiculous, but we're going to earn revenue by repealing the "EV mandate"? Huh? How? Explain it to me like I'm 5
Last edited by Torture; 04-22-2025 at 10:22 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Torture For This Useful Post:
Oh man, this ad (that doesn't feature PP at all, must have realized how unpopular he is) is so cringe. Poor Sarah's doing soo poorly, her white boomer dad had to buy her a house! Better vote for PP!
It's an interesting ad for sure.
Are the CPC worried they are losing the over 65 vote? if so, that's the usual conservative bread and butter.
interesting comment about the son struggling. young male voters are far in the CPC camp
I prefer Poillievre's math. Carney said he was going to cut 1% to the lowest tax bracket at a cost of $22B.
However, Poillievre has managed to find a way to make the cut 2.5x bigger for that bracket, but only costing $8B more.
Carney is way too cautious with his numbers. We need a leader who can be bolder and more optimistic about how much things are going to cost us, for a change.
Shoulda told Sarah to stop buying avocado toast and pull up her bootstraps if he was a true conservative.
This is actually an ad for woke ideology and how not everyone starts at the same point. Sarah's parents probably fully paid for a university degree and a house while some other brown kid is struggling to get ahead at a minimum wage job and has 50k in student loan debt.
Next thing you know PP's slogans will be making revenue for the Gov't too. Budgets balance themselves when you rely on fairy tale numbers. In fact, axing taxes is not going to reduce revenues, it's going to make us money!
Bring it home: 10B
Spike the hike: 5B
Axe the tax: 7.5B
For a change: 100B
All of them are ridiculous, but we're going to earn revenue by repealing the "EV mandate"? Huh? How? Explain it to me like I'm 5
Man they make it look effortless eh? Costed platform, 0 effort, nailed it.
This is actually an ad for woke ideology and how not everyone starts at the same point. Sarah's parents probably fully paid for a university degree and a house while some other brown kid is struggling to get ahead at a minimum wage job and has 50k in student loan debt.
Well conservatives aren’t going to put someone they plan to deport in an ad now are they?
I prefer Poillievre's math. Carney said he was going to cut 1% to the lowest tax bracket at a cost of $22B.
However, Poillievre has managed to find a way to make the cut 2.5x bigger for that bracket, but only costing $8B more.
Carney is way too cautious with his numbers. We need a leader who can be bolder and more optimistic about how much things are going to cost us, for a change.
The Conservative cut is phased in over several years (even though it wasn’t announced that way), which reduces the total cost over the period. But once fully implemented, it does cost 2.5x what the Liberal plan does.
I suspect once they realized they were going to have to actually release a costed platform that they panicked when they realized how much debt that was adding, so they changed it to a phased in cut so the total prepared by the PBO doesn’t look as bad.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to opendoor For This Useful Post:
