Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Slava

Counterpoint, tax breaks aren't the worst because the economy is facing headwinds, and you want to get some growth spurred.

Notley didn't do that in the last election and look what it landed us....

Thanks Rachel.....

[Party Elephant]

I've been scrolling around on 338's projection map and finding it very interesting.

https://338canada.com/map.htm

It also makes calgarygeologist's post the other day about "all of Quebec voting Bloc" even more hilarious.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Slava

Counterpoint, tax breaks aren't the worst because the economy is facing headwinds, and you want to get some growth spurred.

But the tax cut proposals so far are mostly pandering and not actually well thought out. Like, is increasing working seniors' basic personal amount to $34K and adding $5K in TFSA room so people can pump up Canadian bank stocks' value really going to lead to economic growth?

[Torture]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It would depend on your point of view obviously and how much you like privitazation. It's definitely a government for the upper-middle class. If you're in that bracket, more privatization would be seen as favorable. It's kind of saying the quiet parts outloud. I am in that bracket and I disagree

The Registry:
Got rid of license plate stickers, it's now online Okay, but that's pretty thin gruel.
Got rid of advance GDL test Same
Discount for seniors Same

Corporate tax cut from 12% to 8% Agree to disagree

People like the new daycare rates coming in April. Unform flat rate across the board. I have friends who have kids in daycare, their rates cut in half next month.
My kids are too old now, I paid too much for daycare 5 years ago.Thanks Trudeau!

Some privatization of health care, pay small amounts for certain services. I don't suppose you've seen the major scandal that's going on here? Has privatization improved service delivery by any meaningful metrics?

The push for more private schools, some would like that. Agree to disagree

And the controversial trans in schools, parents should know. Again, the quiet part outloud, parents want to know. Agree to disagree

So yeah, if you're not for privatization at all, this all sucks.

So yeah, unless you're a big fan of privatization for the sake of privatization the only universally good things that aren't controversial are some small wins at the registry and childcare which was actually the Federal government so......yay?

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Should they lose the election, the lesson the CPC should learn is if you lie down with dogs, you get fleas. Instead they’ll chalk it up to unforeseen antagonism from Trump and refuse any internal reform or soul searching.

I think that's false. It doesn't explain the fact that the polls were supporting the Conservatives in a huge way for over a year and a half.

I believe the Conservatives will chalk any loss up to a large number of unforeseen factors:

1. The change in leadership from the hated Trudeau to a good looking, very high profile person with a strong economic background

2.The huge advantage by Carney as PM. He could look prime ministerial because he was one.

3. Carney moved the party from the extreme left to the center by adopting the policies that were recently successful for the Conservatives

4, The similarities between the Conservatives and some of the GOP platform eg. DEI and gender issues. However, the backlash against the woke left is not restricted to NA.

5. The lunacy of Trump, and his tariffs

6, Etc.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I think that's false. It doesn't explain the fact that the polls were supporting the Conservatives in a huge way for over a year and a half.

I believe the Conservatives will chalk any loss up to a large number of unforeseen factors:

1. The change in leadership from the hated Trudeau to a good looking, very high profile person with a strong economic background

2.The huge advantage by Carney as PM. He could look prime ministerial because he was one.

3. Carney moved the party from the extreme left to the center by adopting the policies that were recently successful for the Conservatives

4, The similarities between the Conservatives and some of the GOP platform eg. DEI and gender issues. However, the backlash against the woke left is not restricted to NA.

5. The lunacy of Trump, and his tariffs

6, Etc.

I think that's a big misread. The polls were obviously showing(in retrospect) a distaste for Trudeau, not a support of Conservatives.


And the Trudeau Liberals weren't extreme left, give your head a shake.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

So you don't have a problem with people who can absolutely afford it themselves with no negatives to their lives still getting subsidized, while people who can't afford it may now have to work an extra job to make ends meet? Wouldn't it make far more sense to have a cap on income for subsidies, and those dollars go to help the ones who actually need it?

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

You may be interested to know that at a recent town hall several UCP MLAs complained that they aren’t even fans of this program. I don’t know how much of their disapproval was due to the actual program or just it being a product of the federal liberals’ policy but it’s still comical to see someone using it as an argument for things they’ve done well when the UCP don’t even like the program.

But yay for corporate tax cuts in exchange for higher property taxes, wage suppression, gutting worker protections, kicking AISH recipients in the balls and trying to appease the leader of a country that is actively trying to cause us undue economic hardship?

I do have a problem with it. I think it's overcorrecting a problem that didn't really exist. An income cap on subsidies was $180,000 in the old system.

My kids are older so it doesn't affect me anymore but those i know with kids in daycare and even on left-learning reddit, people like it. Remember, people are selfish and one-issue voters, not thinking about the entire societal pie like we do. So to them, this is a good UCP policy, which was what surferguy was asking.

The Liberal policy is to reduce daycare down to $10/day, here's the money provinces, you figure it out. The best Alberta can seem to do is $15/day. The UCP must have felt it was unfair that some people were paying $1000 and others less than $100 under the subsidy system. And yes, we can argue, but they can afford it etc....

And again, the quiet part out loud, some dayhomes were gaming the system, watching kids of friends and getting thousands from the government and charging people nothing and the bigger franchised daycares were losing out. When the Liberals announced this program, dayhomes around Calgary suddenly sprung up.

So now the province has reduced that gap to between $325 and $700, which is the highest rate I've heard of in the new system.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

1. The change in leadership from the hated Trudeau to a good looking, very high profile person with a strong economic background.

Stupid sexy Carney!!!

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by GGG

Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson have a new book called Abundance at its essentially a vision for “liberals” to reshape their political thoughts.

Its thesis is that between 1960 and 1980 the center shifted from being people who build things to people who oppose building things. So the civil rights movements and environmental movements created legal frameworks where any individual could stop something. While well intended it’s created this current environment where nothing can be built.

So government needs to reshape what it does an focus on enabling things to be built to improve prosperity. Essentially low cost clean energy and housing will form the bedrock of a future economy.

Much of this nation building from Carney seems to come from the same themes.

Klein was on the Jon Stewart podcast and talking about red tape. It was really quite extraordinary and it is obvious why it is so hard to get stuff done.

[WideReceiver]

Originally Posted by Slava

Sure, and it's not like you're going to get a lot of disagreement from people. But the thing is, (A) no one cares about this issue today and (B) everyone sees that as just pandering to Trump, which is a huge problem for Poilievre and the CPC as it is.



Just curious, but where would you move?

Maybe Costa Rica, Mexico or Australia. We have friends living in all of those countries. It’d have to have good health care, safety and where English is common.

Don’t misunderstand; I love Canada and think it’s one of the best countries to live in. I will not live in the U.S. or maybe an independent Alberta.

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Gah! I thought I was done with this loser when we voted him out last time. Now he's back for another round? Fuuuuuuuu

So he is not just the bother of that other dude? He bothers you too?


(typo in post)

[Slava]

Originally Posted by opendoor

But the tax cut proposals so far are mostly pandering and not actually well thought out. Like, is increasing working seniors' basic personal amount to $34K and adding $5K in TFSA room so people can pump up Canadian bank stocks' value really going to lead to economic growth?

Well, in general, I dislike all the boutique tax cuts and credits. I think that the tax system is far more complicated than it needs to be, but that's all beside the point. We're stuck with it, and so sure, maybe these cuts are somewhat pandering, but a tax cut at the point we're in is not the worst idea.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Titan2

So he is not just the bother of that other dude? He bothers you too?


(typo in post)

Dave owns that typo, not me!

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

And the controversial trans in schools, parents should know. Again, the quiet part outloud, parents want to know.

"Parents should know" is bad policy, full stop.

The people most dangerous to trans kids who don't feel comfortable telling their parents are typically their parents. How many honour killings do we need on the national statistics? The answer is zero.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

And the Trudeau Liberals weren't extreme left, give your head a shake.

I don't think the Liberals were ever considered far enough left, as to join with the NDP. If you were exposed to Justin and his father, as much as I have been, you would realize how far left that family were. Was Castro not considered a close family friend?

[Party Elephant]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I don't think the Liberals were ever considered far enough left, as to join with the NDP. If you were exposed to Justin and his father, as much as I have been, you would realize how far left that family were. Was Castro not considered a close family friend?

What Trudeau policies were far left, in your opinion?

[puffnstuff]

Dude put down Rebel News and read something else.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Was Castro not considered a close family friend?

He was family in some respects.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

He was family in some respects.

OH I GET IT! BECAUSE HE'S SECRETLY JUSTINS DAD! THATS SO CLEVER!


Mook.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Please, we all know Mick Jagger is actually Justin's dad.