Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Scrambler

But Carney's CV is great for an executive job, not necessarily running a country.

What specifically is it about Carney's CV that makes you think he can't run a country?

Also, what specifically is it about PP's CV that makes you think he can run a country?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It's not that simplistic. There were organizations (including mine) who mandated people get two vaccination shots to remain employed. Not being able to travel is one thing, but not being employed is a different situation.

This was the policy announcement:

What others have said about this applies. But also, companies have every right to mandate almost whatever they want in response to external events, so long as it's not discriminatory or illegal for some other reason, and especially in health and safety areas. Companies mandate safety equipment, working attire, use of the internet, communications, hygene, hours of work, etc.

[Scrambler]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

You have referred to a super majority a few times, but I have no idea the meaning of that in our system. You either have a majority government or a minority.

You make a good point, I've heard it a couple times in legacy media too, I wonder if anyone knows.

My own definition would be a majority that cannot be contested. Like, for example, your party gets a majority by one but that's not a 'super' majority as it could be lost through a bi election or a member going rogue and switching sides, or something like that. Super majority would be 200 seats which cannot be contested, 4 mandate regardless of the events which may occur during the term.

But that's a guess/how I see it.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

What others have said about this applies. But also, companies have every right to mandate almost whatever they want in response to external events, so long as it's not discriminatory or illegal for some other reason, and especially in health and safety areas. Companies mandate safety equipment, working attire, use of the internet, communications, hygene, hours of work, etc.

I don't disagree. I said early during the pandemic that COVID protocols were like putting a stop sign at an intersection or a restaurant mandating shirts and shoes. You don't hear people stomping their feet and screaming, "It's against my personal freedoms to make me stop at an intersection!"

But a vaccine into ones body and then having it hinge on employment, that hits some people (voters) differently. How would a new COVID be treated today? Would the lockdowns and the mandates be the same? Are we totally ok because we are more educated about vaccines. That's an issue for some in the election too.

Not for me, I'm totally pro masking and pro vaccination. I loved being socially distanced!

[Scrambler]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

What specifically is it about Carney's CV that makes you think he can't run a country?

Also, what specifically is it about PP's CV that makes you think he can run a country?

I don't know, politicians are politicians because they're politicians? Not sure why years of being re-elected are suddenly a detriment. An experienced politician can probably have a better go at it compared to someone from another profession?

A Doctor may have a fantastic education and is successful in what they do, but probably wouldn't be as good at lawyering?

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I don't disagree. I said early during the pandemic that COVID protocols were like putting a stop sign at an intersection or a restaurant mandating shirts and shoes. You don't hear people stomping their feet and screaming, "It's against my personal freedoms to make me stop at an intersection!"

But a vaccine into ones body and then having it hinge on employment, that hits some people (voters) differently. How would a new COVID be treated today? Would the lockdowns and the mandates be the same? Are we totally ok because we are more educated about vaccines. That's an issue for some in the election too.

This isn't entirely new though. There's been debate for years whether health case workers should be required to take the flu vaccine for example. My daughter required a rabies vaccination and an up to date tetanus shot as a condition of her employment.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Scrambler

You make a good point, I've heard it a couple times in legacy media too, I wonder if anyone knows.

My own definition would be a majority that cannot be contested. Like, for example, your party gets a majority by one but that's not a 'super' majority as it could be lost through a bi election or a member going rogue and switching sides, or something like that. Super majority would be 200 seats which cannot be contested, 4 mandate regardless of the events which may occur during the term.

But that's a guess/how I see it.

I thought super majority was 2/3 of the seats.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by aaronck

I looked up his conservative opponent, Shuv Majumdar, his qualifications seem to include going to U of C with PP, helping organize the Kamikaze campaign to get Kenney elected, working in Frazier institute think tanks for Manning and many other various political jobs-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shuvaloy_Majumdar

It's odd considering how the right reveres "businessmen" and hate "politicians" but the CPC (and UCP) genereally attract a lot of career politicians and political lobbyists as opposed to business experienced people, especially in the upper echelons. Kenney, Smith, Harper, Lantsman, Genuis, etc.

You have to go back to Mulroney to find a strong business/private background.

Now liberals: Chretien was a lawyer, so was Turner, Martin worked at Power Corporation/Canadian Steamship Lines. Ignatieff and Dion were profs. I mean, they criticized Trudeau for being a "drama teacher" (his actual role was more math and French but whatever) but at least it was a job (as well as a lot of charity running).

Their problem with Carney is that now they have to take pot shots at business involvement.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Super majority is an American concept, although even that isn't technically correct. There's the filibuster-proof majority (60 seats in the Senate) and the veto-proof majority (2/3 of seats in both the House and Senate). But I have never heard it used in Canadian politics before. But it makes sense conservative supporters are using it since they get most of their media from US right wing sources and the related.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Scrambler

I don't know, politicians are politicians because they're politicians? Not sure why years of being re-elected are suddenly a detriment. An experienced politician can probably have a better go at it compared to someone from another profession?

A Doctor may have a fantastic education and is successful in what they do, but probably wouldn't be as good at lawyering?

Carney was the head of the Bank of England & the Head of the Bank if Canada.

He has also held numerous senior leadership roles in the private sector.

You don't get into these roles without understanding and being involved in politics.

But at the end of the day You Don't Know. Sadly that says a lot.

[Rhett44]

I don't like either candidate. All comes down to who you think is less bad.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Super majority is an American concept, although even that isn't technically correct. There's the filibuster-proof majority (60 seats in the Senate) and the veto-proof majority (2/3 of seats in both the House and Senate). But I have never heard it used in Canadian politics before. But it makes sense conservative supporters are using it since they get most of their media from US right wing sources and the related.

Jagmeet Singh has been yapping/warning about it for the last week. I guess he's been spending too much time looking at right wing sources?

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said Tuesday that voters who want to prevent a Liberal "super majority" should support New Democrats.

"British Columbians … I'm going to specifically talk to you right now. Here in B.C., you have an incredibly important role to play in this election," he said. "You can make the difference between Mark Carney getting a super majority or sending enough New Democrats to Ottawa so we can fight to defend the things you care about."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...rity-1.7515860

[GioforPM]

Supermajority is not really a thing in Candada (despite Singh warning against one the other day).

There's no real significance between having 51% and 75% of the seats.

[indes]

Anecdotal but I haven't talked to a single CPC supporter that can tell me one policy they are on board with from the CPC. Not a single one. Just "Trudeau", "lost liberal decade", "WEF". It's absolutely unreal. There needs to be a questionnaire to vote, people watch some tiktoks and get outraged about "raising capital gains tax" when they couldn't rub 2 nickels together.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

If or when Carney is elected, I will be looking for:

1. The cessation or slow impeded development of our oil and gas

2. Slow growth with increased spending accompanied by rising interest rates

3. Companies moving out of Canada

4. Possible collapse of house prices

5. Potential conflicts of interest e.g. Brookfield

6. Probable increased areas of taxation e.g. capital gains

Just the way I see it. There's no way one man can turn that party around.

Cool I can do it too.

If Poilievre were elected I will be looking for:

1) Cost of living increases higher than OECD that more than offsets any tax cuts.

2) Reduction in quality of services, that is not offset by a reduction in government spending.

3) Increasing nation debt per capita and debt to GDP ratio

4) Divestment of government assets that will carry a very large price tag in the service of making his poor economic performance look slightly better in the short term.

5) Less deliberate and clear strategy for countering US antagonization

6) Increased focus on 'Gender' and 'Women's' issues, that only the right seems to care about but sure loves to talk about how everyone else is shoving the issue down their throats when the rest of us just want to leave everyone to live their own lives.

Just based on the performance / policy proposals of recent CPC & UCP governments.

[Scrambler]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Carney was the head of the Bank of England & the Head of the Bank if Canada.

He has also held numerous senior leadership roles in the private sector.

You don't get into these roles without understanding and being involved in politics.

But at the end of the day You Don't Know. Sadly that says a lot.

Fair enough, let's just say my assessment of Carney is slightly unreasonable since he just got airdopped into this. I did read his book though so I know a lot about his perspectives. I don't like it but perhaps the masses do.

If Carney stays as PM I may appreciate what he does eventually. I'm not so closed minded that I won't give him a chance. Similar to how Liberal supporters were eager to begrudgingly vote for Pierre if the election happened last year in spite of Trudeau. Being open minded is a good trait in my opinion.

On the flipside, in the US, it feels like with the likes of Fox News etc that Trump can do absolutely nothing wrong, nothing gets called out or criticized. It's all one way thinking.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Supermajority is not really a thing in Candada (despite Singh warning against one the other day).

There's no real significance between having 51% and 75% of the seats.

The only thing more seats do for a party is prevent worry about defections or by-election losses affecting the balance of power.

Other than that, does nothing.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by simmer2

blah blah blah blah

Not a single point on why PP would make a good PM? I mean it is super hard to come up with something. DoctorFever has taken 6 months and still doesn't have a single point. lol

[GGG]

Originally Posted by simmer2

Not sure if you have hired people in your role (that's not a jab, just a question), but I've found it easy to get fooled by resumes. I've had people whose resumes are OK and turned out great, and had people whose resumes are great and have turned out just OK.

I like Carney a lot more than Trudeau. He's obviously bright and has a pedigree. But a bright person can still make bad decisions...and I worry that his Climate Change stance will end up leading to a continual series of bad decisions that the Liberals started when they moved forward with the Carbon Tax and caused a huge increase in our debt loads and were a huge part of lowest GDP per Capita relative to our peers.

I see more debt load, bad energy policies (ie pushing green over Oil & Gas), an increase in government spending and taxes, and in general an underperforming economy for another 5 years.

I hope that doesn't happen and Carney can prove me wrong. But it's been 10 years...hard to get excited about thinking that Carney will maybe be different.

I think that is probably a fair assessment that Carney will continues to to implement carbon taxation in a similar manner to the EU. That will put a small drag on the economy but a stable carbon price is better for industry than one that will rotate by government. If an industrial carbon tax is a conservative loss away companies will not invest capital to mitigate and not build to projects. Uncertainty is not good for business.

For me I’m voting for Carney because he has the expertise to manage to impacts of Carbon transition without just following ideology.

My decision is almost entirely based on who I believe will have evidence based policies and be willing to adapt policy when it isn’t working.

The other part of my decision is based on fear. I equate PP to Smith and don’t believe there would be meaningful socially economic policy differences between the two. And Smith is essentially a trip back to the spoil system.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Not a single point on why PP would make a good PM? I mean it is super hard to come up with something. DoctorFever has taken 6 months and still doesn't have a single point. lol

This is funny coming from you as your entire Schtick is saying how bad PP will be. Based on your posting you are voting against PP and not for Carney.