Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I don't buy the premise. The stock markets in Canada generally perform marginally better under Liberal governments than Conservative. Including Trudeau's.

No one said anything about the stock market in your quote. Talk about a strawman.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Firebot

No one said anything about the stock market in your quote. Talk about a strawman.

They talked about investors.

Show me that investing is otherwise down in the last 10 years. And try to consider more than PNG.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

They talked about investors.

Show me that investing is otherwise down in the last 10 years. And try to consider more than PNG.

Investing != stock market performance

Multiple articles and studies on underinvestment exist.

And it’s still worth mentioning that the survey reports nominal Investment spending, where most of the growth in the past years was driven by higher prices. Indeed, at last count in Q3 2024, the average price of business investments was up 23% since 2019, while ‘real’ investment that excludes price impacts was down 2.3% from levels a year ago and 2.2% lower than levels in pre-pandemic 2019.

https://thoughtleadership.rbc.com/tr...ent-in-canada/

You may be surprised to learn that the stock market has increased regardless of which party controls parliament, with the S&P/TSX Composite providing an annualized return of roughly 10% since 1977.1 Although there has been volatility over the years, the stock market has done well regardless of which party holds office. These long-term results should serve to give you confidence in the market regardless of election results.

Do government policies impact my investment returns?
Although changes in government policies can affect investment returns, they’re much harder to predict than you might think, and the consequences of policy changes are usually not as expected. We think it’s better to follow time-tested investment principles and avoid letting politics influence your long-term strategy.

How do politics impact the markets?
Politicians often make many promises that go unfulfilled. That’s partly due to governmental systems of checks and balances. However, we believe market forces are more powerful than political forces over the long term. What sounds promising during election campaigns often may not work in reality.

Yet despite each these conclusions statements in the very study you linked stating that politics have little impact (on financial markets, not what you quoted), you still produced a very partisan conclusion.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

They talked about investors.

Show me that investing is otherwise down in the last 10 years. And try to consider more than PNG.

I won't post much detail because there is a lot talked about in this report so you can review it yourself:
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/...024001-eng.htm

Investment in fixed capital has been weak in Canada since the mid-2000s. The ratio of investment to net capital stock and investment per worker declined after 2006, especially after 2014. As a result of this investment slowdown, the growth in labour productivity declined after 2006.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Investing != stock market performance

Multiple articles and studies on underinvestment exist.



https://thoughtleadership.rbc.com/tr...ent-in-canada/







Yet despite each these conclusions statements in the very study you linked stating that politics have little impact (on financial markets, not what you quoted), you still produced a very partisan conclusion.

Yes, my "very partisan" conclusion that the perfomance was marginally better under Liberal governments.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I won't post much detail because there is a lot talked about in this report so you can review it yourself:
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/...024001-eng.htm

I'll tell you what it doesn't say: that any government policies had anything to do with the conclusions. And in fact, it suggests that tax cuts should have increased investment but didn't.

But what the charts also show is that investment crashed, then increased under Harper but then declined to its starting point before he left office, and then just started to climb againunder Trudeau through 2019.

[simmer2]

I cannot see a leadership change with the Liberas will magically change their fiscal prudence.

Thanks to the Liberals, Canadians are now paying $1B per week in interest on the national debt.

Socialist BC governments have led to BC Provincial debt being downgraded due to record deficits.

Liberals increased public servants by 40% since 2015.

Liberal party spent $20.7B per year on consultants. That is a 100% increase over when they started 10 years ago the government was spending $10B.

Health Bureaucracy.

BC, 5M people. $347M in costs. ~70 VP's.
AB, 4M people. $181M in costs. ~8 VP's.
Maybe the BC should fire some government and VP's.

Carney proposes becoming developers for affordable housing. Government can't build anything...this idea is terrible.

Liberals have spent $11B on 3rd world gender programs. To be clear, Canada didn't have the money so they borrowed it from our grandchildren.

The list could go on and on, but I am unfortunately surprised that people refuse to want a more affordable future and take more of the control in their own hands rather than wasting another 4 years of more debt that our grandchildren will still be paying off.

[Drak]

I know. Let’s vote for all-slogan, Canada trashing MAGAt PP and hand our country over to the Americans. That’s the ticket!

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by simmer2

Liberals have spent $11B on 3rd world gender programs.

We regularly heard Trudeau speak about gender equality and such non-economic topics. If Trudeau was still running, you’d have an excellent point.

Do you see these kind of idealistic programs anywhere in the current Liberal list of priorities?

[Muta]

Originally Posted by simmer2

The list could go on and on, but I am unfortunately surprised that people refuse to want a more affordable future and take more of the control in their own hands rather than wasting another 4 years of more debt that our grandchildren will still be paying off.

Everyone wants affordability. Our country's sovereignty is at stake however, under direct threat from an authoritarian regime formulating down south, intent on also destroying us economically. Trump is on record saying he would prefer PP to lead Canada (even though PP hasn't held a real world job before), PP's platforms (the few ones where he can actually not mention Carney or the Liberals somehow) align with the extreme right/ MAGA movement which is not what people want. Sorry, but this is the last thing this country needs right now.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by simmer2

I cannot see a leadership change with the Liberas will magically change their fiscal prudence.

Thanks to the Liberals, Canadians are now paying $1B per week in interest on the national debt.

Socialist BC governments have led to BC Provincial debt being downgraded due to record deficits.

Liberals increased public servants by 40% since 2015.

Liberal party spent $20.7B per year on consultants. That is a 100% increase over when they started 10 years ago the government was spending $10B.

Health Bureaucracy.

BC, 5M people. $347M in costs. ~70 VP's.
AB, 4M people. $181M in costs. ~8 VP's.
Maybe the BC should fire some government and VP's.

Carney proposes becoming developers for affordable housing. Government can't build anything...this idea is terrible.

Liberals have spent $11B on 3rd world gender programs. To be clear, Canada didn't have the money so they borrowed it from our grandchildren.

The list could go on and on, but I am unfortunately surprised that people refuse to want a more affordable future and take more of the control in their own hands rather than wasting another 4 years of more debt that our grandchildren will still be paying off.

Even against all that...the polls still show Liberals in lead.

That should show you how terrible of a candidate Poilievre is and why the CPC is focusing on the wrong things.

It's PP's election to lose. Non-stop.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by simmer2

I cannot see a leadership change with the Liberas will magically change their fiscal prudence.

Thanks to the Liberals, Canadians are now paying $1B per week in interest on the national debt.

Socialist BC governments have led to BC Provincial debt being downgraded due to record deficits.

Liberals increased public servants by 40% since 2015.

Liberal party spent $20.7B per year on consultants. That is a 100% increase over when they started 10 years ago the government was spending $10B.

Health Bureaucracy.

BC, 5M people. $347M in costs. ~70 VP's.
AB, 4M people. $181M in costs. ~8 VP's.
Maybe the BC should fire some government and VP's.

Carney proposes becoming developers for affordable housing. Government can't build anything...this idea is terrible.

Liberals have spent $11B on 3rd world gender programs. To be clear, Canada didn't have the money so they borrowed it from our grandchildren.

The list could go on and on, but I am unfortunately surprised that people refuse to want a more affordable future and take more of the control in their own hands rather than wasting another 4 years of more debt that our grandchildren will still be paying off.

Have you looked at the US debt?

Debts are an issue but it's not just "socialist" governments having debt issues, particularly post covid spending measures.

The CPC plan for mass tax cuts would likely lead to much more debt; money has to come from somewhere.
IIRC, the GST cut on new homes they're proposing would be $14 Billion in reduced revenue alone.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by calculoso

We regularly heard Trudeau speak about gender equality and such non-economic topics. If Trudeau was still running, you’d have an excellent point.

Do you see these kind of idealistic programs anywhere in the current Liberal list of priorities?

I think its fair to ask about those items - basically the Liberals have changed one person in the government and stopped talking about all the stuff that is no longer popular. But many of the "changes" are as cosmetic as possible - so while they aren't advertising that spending if they haven't specifically repudiated it I'd expect it to continue.

As an example, the carbon tax was so deeply unpopular they had no choice but to end it, which Carney did with great fanfare. For consumers.

But businesses are still paying, and having our industrial base at a structural disadvantage to American competitors right now is a bad idea.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by calculoso

We regularly heard Trudeau speak about gender equality and such non-economic topics. If Trudeau was still running, you’d have an excellent point.

Do you see these kind of idealistic programs anywhere in the current Liberal list of priorities?

This is the wrong argument to make.

The question that needs to be looked at is what all got included in this 11 billion in foreign aid and why is it called “gender”

What the 11 billion number appears to come from is the spending done under FIAP - Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy. Now that sounds like a big scary woke program but it’s really just foreign aid for womens and childrens health, wellness and reproductive care

https://www.international.gc.ca/worl....aspx?lang=eng

So instead of using the term “3rd world gender programs” we should say foreign aid. If you want to spend less on foreign aid we should have that discussion but complaining that the aid is targeting improving women’s lives in third world countries because improvement in women’s lives improves critical poverty outcomes seems like the wrong discussion to have.

So the question to Simmer should be How much money should Canada spend on foreign aid.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Firebot

Much like how people flocked to the CPC not because of Poilievre, but because the Liberal-NDP coalition was just that destructive, people are flocking away from the CPC because of Poilievre's lack of leadership facing tariffs that is currently present with Carney / Liberals.

Negative polarization is the name of the game in politics today. The Canadian electorate isn’t in love with Carney - they just hate Poilievre.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by simmer2

I cannot see a leadership change with the Liberas will magically change their fiscal prudence.

Thanks to the Liberals, Canadians are now paying $1B per week in interest on the national debt.

Socialist BC governments have led to BC Provincial debt being downgraded due to record deficits.

Liberals increased public servants by 40% since 2015.

Liberal party spent $20.7B per year on consultants. That is a 100% increase over when they started 10 years ago the government was spending $10B.

Health Bureaucracy.

BC, 5M people. $347M in costs. ~70 VP's.
AB, 4M people. $181M in costs. ~8 VP's.
Maybe the BC should fire some government and VP's.

Carney proposes becoming developers for affordable housing. Government can't build anything...this idea is terrible.

Liberals have spent $11B on 3rd world gender programs. To be clear, Canada didn't have the money so they borrowed it from our grandchildren.

The list could go on and on, but I am unfortunately surprised that people refuse to want a more affordable future and take more of the control in their own hands rather than wasting another 4 years of more debt that our grandchildren will still be paying off.

Curious what your source is for these things. Any references? Like, the healthcare number doesn't even seem like you could compare currently, given that AHS has been blown apart into several new organizations, which presumably have their own "surplus" vp's, if that's even anything to worry about.


Would really like to see where that $11 billion number comes from, too, and what it represents. Is this just a Reddit list or something, or did you come up with these?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

I think its fair to ask about those items - basically the Liberals have changed one person in the government and stopped talking about all the stuff that is no longer popular. But many of the "changes" are as cosmetic as possible - so while they aren't advertising that spending if they haven't specifically repudiated it I'd expect it to continue.

You don’t need to change the cabinet to change policy. Liberals have always been pretty flexible in their approach to governing, tacking this way or that to try to catch the popular mood. The same Liberal cabinet who raised immigration a few years ago has substantially reduced rates.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by simmer2

I cannot see a leadership change with the Liberas will magically change their fiscal prudence.

Thanks to the Liberals, Canadians are now paying $1B per week in interest on the national debt.

Socialist BC governments have led to BC Provincial debt being downgraded due to record deficits.

Liberals increased public servants by 40% since 2015.

Liberal party spent $20.7B per year on consultants. That is a 100% increase over when they started 10 years ago the government was spending $10B.

Health Bureaucracy.

BC, 5M people. $347M in costs. ~70 VP's.
AB, 4M people. $181M in costs. ~8 VP's.
Maybe the BC should fire some government and VP's.

Carney proposes becoming developers for affordable housing. Government can't build anything...this idea is terrible.

Liberals have spent $11B on 3rd world gender programs. To be clear, Canada didn't have the money so they borrowed it from our grandchildren.

The list could go on and on, but I am unfortunately surprised that people refuse to want a more affordable future and take more of the control in their own hands rather than wasting another 4 years of more debt that our grandchildren will still be paying off.

Are you equating the Liberals in BC with the feds? Because they are in no way related.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

Have you looked at the US debt?

Debts are an issue but it's not just "socialist" governments having debt issues, particularly post covid spending measures.

The CPC plan for mass tax cuts would likely lead to much more debt; money has to come from somewhere.
IIRC, the GST cut on new homes they're proposing would be $14 Billion in reduced revenue alone.

Yeah, it’s funny how often people who are deficit hawks also call for deep cuts to government revenue. Unfunded tax cuts are just as fiscally irresponsible as unfunded spending promises.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by simmer2

I cannot see a leadership change with the Liberas will magically change their fiscal prudence.

Thanks to the Liberals, Canadians are now paying $1B per week in interest on the national debt.

Socialist BC governments have led to BC Provincial debt being downgraded due to record deficits.

Liberals increased public servants by 40% since 2015.

Liberal party spent $20.7B per year on consultants. That is a 100% increase over when they started 10 years ago the government was spending $10B.

Health Bureaucracy.

BC, 5M people. $347M in costs. ~70 VP's.
AB, 4M people. $181M in costs. ~8 VP's.
Maybe the BC should fire some government and VP's.

Carney proposes becoming developers for affordable housing. Government can't build anything...this idea is terrible.

Liberals have spent $11B on 3rd world gender programs. To be clear, Canada didn't have the money so they borrowed it from our grandchildren.

The list could go on and on, but I am unfortunately surprised that people refuse to want a more affordable future and take more of the control in their own hands rather than wasting another 4 years of more debt that our grandchildren will still be paying off.

The increase in public servants isn't as radical as you suggest when you consider population growth.

Number of employees
357,247 active employees in 2023 (282,980 in 2010)
Represents 0.90% of the Canadian population in 2023 (0.83% in 2010)

https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-bo...vice-2023.html


Most of the federal government debt is a legacy of the pandemic.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tru...vice-1.7172339