Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[shotinthebacklund]

That was Chretiens direct quote... He used it to show how he formed a Centrist Government.
Basically saying he was a rational government...

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

I am familiar with the program as well as what are the perceived benefits of the program. Fentanyl is one of the drugs being provided under safe supply.

You realize that fentanyl patches and the pills the government supplies are not the same as street fentanyl, right?

Diversion just means people are attaining the safe supply drugs and then selling them to their "clients". The concept is they should still be "clean" drugs. There is a whole ring involved of mules getting them then having to turn them into their dealers.

*citation needed

[woob]

50,000 people had their section 7 right to life violated by the open borders, soft on crime, legal drugs policy of the Liberals

I cannot roll my eyes any harder.

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You realize that fentanyl patches and the pills the government supplies are not the same as street fentanyl, right?



*citation needed

https://vancouversun.com/news/vpd-de...being-diverted

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

That was Chretiens direct quote... He used it to show how he formed a Centrist Government.
Basically saying he was a rational government...

I think you missed the point of my post.

[shotinthebacklund]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I think you missed the point of my post.

Is the point that its stupid? because I agree.

[belsarius]

The next part of that interview had him basically describing a centrist as someone who is called a leftist by the right and a right winger by the left. So in that way it seems like he was correct.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I think use of the term “radical centre” is just about the greatest illustration of how absurd using left/right/centre to describe political views really is.

How about we focus less on radical views and more on rational ones?

Seriously, wtf is radical centre supposed to even mean?

Rational though? in politics?

get out of here with those radical ideas!

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I think use of the term “radical centre” is just about the greatest illustration of how absurd using left/right/centre to describe political views really is.

How about we focus less on radical views and more on rational ones?

Seriously, wtf is radical centre supposed to even mean?

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

It's not like it's anything new. Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Chretien were most definitely radical centrists in their way of governing. Ross Perot was seen as one. You are taking the word radical too literally.

Perot did not fit the usual political stereotypes; his views were seen as either pragmatic or populist, depending on the observer, and usually focused on his economic policy, such as balancing the budget, to gain support from both Democratic and Republican voters. Perot supported stricter gun control such as an assault weapons ban and supported increased research in AIDS.[74][75] Perot was hesitant on covering the issue of gay rights during his 1992 campaign, but openly supported gay rights in 1996.[76][77]

Nowadays "radical centrist" is barely a thing. If Liberals actively shifted their focus back to the center and radicalism which at least on the surface Carney is trying to do, it probably would piss off a lot of self described progressives while Conservatives would still see them as left. That's how you know they hit center.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Firebot

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

It's not like it's anything new. Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Chretien were most definitely radical centrists in their way of governing. Ross Perot was seen as one. You are taking the word radical too literally.



Nowadays "radical centrist" is barely a thing. If Liberals actively shifted their focus back to the center and radicalism which at least on the surface Carney is trying to do, it probably would piss off a lot of self described progressives while Conservatives would still see them as left. That's how you know they hit center.

I think you’re giving the words left, right and centre(politically speaking) too much credibility.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by belsarius

The next part of that interview had him basically describing a centrist as someone who is called a leftist by the right and a right winger by the left. So in that way it seems like he was correct.

To me even that explanation perpetuates the problem.

Not about to get on a soapbox about this because I think I know what he’s trying to say but I loathe his use of the left/right rhetoric because it reinforces the idea that it’s a sensible concept.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

https://vancouversun.com/news/vpd-de...being-diverted

Sorry, I misread the post. Yes, diversion happens. No system is going to be perfect.

What is the alternative avenue you would suggest that immediately gets safer drugs into the hands of people who need them?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by shotinthebacklund

https://markcarney.ca/media/2025/01/...mer-carbon-tax


Mark Carneys plan for Climate action.

Promote fair competition and improve environmental outcomes by developing a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.
- This is his introduced carbon tariff. A plan to make any goods coming into the country that do not come from a ( Climate action) country EG. all of them. to be subject to a Carbon Tariff.

Have big polluters pay consumers to lower their carbon footprint by developing and integrating a new consumer carbon credit market with the industrial pricing system.By linking the consumer carbon market, we will improve market efficiency and maintain fiscal neutrality, while the government will ensure price certainty for consumers that supports investment.
- I bet they will love just paying the carbon tax for everyone. No way that makes it down to the consumer level right?

Improve subsidies for heat pumps to make home heating more affordable by strengthening the current oil-to-heat pump affordability program, allowing low- and middle-income households to save more on their home energy bills.

Introduce new consumer incentives to lower costs for families investing in our clean future, such as through home retrofits. We will enhance and recapitalize the Greener Homes Grant and improve the efficiency of the application process. These measures will be targeted to lower income households.
- If you have ever tried to use these programs, you will know he means spend 50k and we will maybe try and give you 1500 back (eg windows) Targeted to lower income households, well, hope you own your home or that rent is going up because its been upgraded.

Phase out the use of fossil fuels in federal government buildings by 2030 to reduce government energy bills.
Implement a taxonomy for every priority sector by fall 2026. As a key early priority, we will kickstart the development of clear, science-based criteria to identify those economic activities that are in “transition.” These guidelines will apply to activities in the electricity, transportation, buildings, agriculture and forestry, manufacturing, and extractives sectors
- Someone will need to explain what the goal is here for me. Whats the goal here? How does it apply to climate policy?

Mandate broad coverage of climate risk disclosure for companies across Canada. This will increase transparency for investors to better assess climate risks and opportunities and help align capital towards a sustainable economy. We will prioritize working with provincial, territorial, and international partners and ensure disclosure requirements align with international best practice.
This sounds like its play by our rules or else to me... To bad for any industries they dont agree with.

This is a great plan. It will destroy him in the polls.

His plan is literally to put a Carbon Tarrif on US and Chinese goods. It’s political suicide right now. Even if that is solely rebated and protects domestic manufacturing and energy production, and is what Europe is doing it’s going to play badly.

Now instead of a tax on everything it literally is a tax on everything. World wide this is the solution to let the market solve climate change. If the US did it too it would effectively force China to care too.

This was the fear post steel comments. Economically smart politically immature.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GGG

This is a great plan. It will destroy him in the polls.

His plan is literally to put a Carbon Tarrif on US and Chinese goods. It’s political suicide right now. Even if that is solely rebated and protects domestic manufacturing and energy production, and is what Europe is doing it’s going to play badly.

Now instead of a tax on everything it literally is a tax on everything. World wide this is the solution to let the market solve climate change. If the US did it too it would effectively force China to care too.

This was the fear post steel comments. Economically smart politically immature.

It is not a great plan.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Weitz

It is not a great plan.

It is a great plan

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Weitz

It is not a great plan.

I’m interested in discussing what you don’t like about it?

Is it just that Until the US takes climate change seriously we shouldn’t either or in an environment where you want to reduce emissions for your country this is a bad plan? Or is it something else?

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GGG

I’m interested in discussing what you don’t like about it?

Is it just that Until the US takes climate change seriously we shouldn’t either or in an environment where you want to reduce emissions for your country this is a bad plan? Or is it something else?

How does this help people with the cost of living and not hurt the cost of living?

The discussion about emissions is irrelevant. Canada isn’t convincing anyone to do anything.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Weitz

How does this help people with the cost of living and not hurt the cost of living?

The discussion about emissions is irrelevant. Canada isn’t convincing anyone to do anything.

Can you quote the specific sections that are confusing?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Weitz

How does this help people with the cost of living and not hurt the cost of living?

The discussion about emissions is irrelevant. Canada isn’t convincing anyone to do anything.

It doesn’t it will make everything more expensive and will depend what they do with the Carbon Tarrif money. In theory it could be wealth transfer from polluting industries to consumers through modification of the industrial carbon system where he talks about consumers being able to sell credits to industry

In the detail section they just state this

In the coming weeks, we will outline major additional economic measures to strengthen the economy and ensure households are immediately better off, following the removal of the rebate.

So I suspect the tax as outlined is negative from a consumer standpoint. We will see what rebates look like.

So when I say it’s a good plan I think it’s effective at reducing emissions while maintaining competitiveness for Canadian businesses. It effectively places Carbon taxes on all goods that are hidden from the consumer. If they are rebated back effectively it will minimize economic drag.

But it certainly doesn’t help with cost of living at best it’s fairly neutral just like the existing Carbon tax. And the bigger risk is that the Carbon Tarriff triggers trade wars

It’s just politically foolish to claim you are axing the Carbon tax by replacing it with a far broader carbon tax.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by GGG

It doesn’t it will make everything more expensive and will depend what they do with the Carbon Tarrif money. In theory it could be wealth transfer from polluting industries to consumers through modification of the industrial carbon system where he talks about consumers being able to sell credits to industry

In the detail section they just state this


So I suspect the tax as outlined is negative from a consumer standpoint. We will see what rebates look like.

So when I say it’s a good plan I think it’s effective at reducing emissions while maintaining competitiveness for Canadian businesses. It effectively places Carbon taxes on all goods that are hidden from the consumer. If they are rebated back effectively it will minimize economic drag.

But it certainly doesn’t help with cost of living at best it’s fairly neutral just like the existing Carbon tax. And the bigger risk is that the Carbon Tarriff triggers trade wars

It’s just politically foolish to claim you are axing the Carbon tax by replacing it with a far broader carbon tax.

I think this is a stretch at best, and likely will just end up resulting in poorer results for people on the whole.

If I was voting for a leader I’d be curious to see how other plans stack up. But I have a hard time seeing how someone like Carney can grow the economy and diversify our exports (especially in times like this) when a major plank of his is something like this.